On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Alan McGovern <[email protected]>wrote:
> If the ubuntu devs are happy with installing one giant tarball as supplied > my Novell, then it's amazingly simple to supply them with new packages every > time Novell releases a new version of Mono. > > Hey that sound pretty awesome if Novell could just provide a package that allow us to install mono into /opt/mono (like mention in the parallel doc) that would be awesome. Frankly speaking just to build libgdiplus-2.6 is killing me already :) feel like I need to learn all these little thing instead ready to say "Hello World !", HELP ! PLEASE However, they are not happy. They have their own strict packaging guidelines > and do a lot of extra work splitting the standard install into dozens of > small individual packages. This is one of the reasons why Ubuntu/Debian lags > behind. > You don't have to worry about that I download the package off mono-project I am ready to take responsibility as long as the installation I allow me to it in a parallel maner (I hope I am talking the right term) > > It's not up to Novell, or any project, to create packages for every distro > under the sun (whether it be the most popular distro or least popular > distro) when each distro has its own specific packaging policies which > essentially means one unique package will have to be created using different > rules for every distro. If you wish to employ someone to do that, feel free. > > Your examples with Chrome and gnome do aren't quite the same as mono > though. Mono is a core framework. Changing that will affect multiple > applications and can (potentially) cause things to stop working in strange > and unusual ways if an application relies on a bug which was fixed. If you > install a broken Chrome, all that's broken is Chrome. You don't end up with > a dozen broken apps on your system. > > Alan. > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:58 AM, daniel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The ubuntu devs package and deploy for their release which happens every >> 6 months. it is insane to say its up to them to package version released >> between OS versions. >> >> Ubuntu comes with a packaged version on gnome do, which is fine, however >> I choose to use a more recent version of gnome do so I use a PPA which >> is supplied by the developers (not the ubuntu devs) >> >> The fact that ubuntu/devian developers package mono for you for its OS >> releases is a bonus, did Microsoft package up mono and include it in >> its Windows 7? NO! did Apple package up mono and include it in snow >> leopard? no. So ubuntu is helping you guys out hugely but do you thank >> them? no, you just expect more of them. >> >> I also use Chrome in ubuntu. Its not in the repros at all, when I wanted >> to install chrome did google say... O sorry its up to ubuntu/debian to >> package chrome for you, its not our fault if they don't. No, they >> packaged it themselves and even provided different channels so I can >> decide exactly how cutting edge I want to be. >> >> So you have to worry about a newer version breaking existing >> applications, how is this different from on any other operating system? >> >> It's not up to the ubuntu devs to package new versions of mono for exist >> OS releases, its up to the mono project to do this and provide it as a >> PPA. >> >> The question you need to ask is, how important is the largest desktop >> linux distribution to the mono project. >> >> At my work we started to port a .net application to mono, however it >> need to run on ubuntu (8.04) do you know what version of mono is in >> 8.04 its 1.2.6, everything for our app was supported in mono 2.4 but >> mono 1.2.6? not even close. So we abandoned our efforts, I'm sure their >> are lots of other people out there with similar stories. Those of us who >> use ubuntu feel a little bit like second class citizens. >> >> >> >> B.R. wrote: >> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Bálint Kardos <[email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > >> > Hi Stephen, >> > >> > Fact 1: the provider decides on the virtualized platforms, not me. >> > They have Fedora, Ubuntu or Debian systems ready. >> > >> > Fact 2: I've used Debian and Fedora for a decade, so I'm more >> > familiar with Ubuntu as with SuSe. >> > >> > Fact 3: I've started working on merging all my sites/servers back >> > to Windows 2008. >> > It is a sad story, but the lack of real features on mono (Web >> > Services still has bugs for years, the LINQ implementation is a >> > horror etc.) makes it more and more hard to use it as a real >> > Production (not a toy playground) platform. >> > >> > >> > üdvözlettel >> > with regards >> > >> > Kardos Bálint >> > _______________________________________ >> > http://skaelede.hu 10 (0xA) év a magyar weben >> > >> > >> > If there are web services bugs, file bugs--if nobody knows about them, >> > they can't get fixed. Also, clarify what you mean by LINQ? LINQ to >> > Objects is pretty simple and there's only so many ways to implement >> > that, so I'm not sure how you can lay claim to that being a horror. >> > LINQ to SQL is a different story, and a huge effort that is only now >> > beginning to be integrated into Mono properly. You could also file >> > bugs for those--once again, if nobody knows about them, they can't get >> > fixed. >> > >> > --B.R. >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Mono-list maillist - [email protected] >> > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mono-list maillist - [email protected] >> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Mono-list maillist - [email protected] > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > >
_______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
