Re: request for a mono vote.
In 4a6b3b97.60...@gmail.com, Πρεκατές Αλέξανδρος wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. Do you have some evidence that Microsoft has *any* copyright, patent, or trademark claim on the code in Mono? 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? I don't see how this has anything to do with the Free Software status of Mono and that is all that matters for sorting software into main/contrib/non-free. Free Software that does not depend on non-Free Software goes in main, Free Software that depends on non-Free Software goes in contrib, and non-Free Software goes into non-free. 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. I don't see how providing Mono puts Debian in middleware rivalries anymore than providing Perl, Python, Ruby, Rails, Java, TomCat, GlassFish. +1 for a voting procedure. I'm pretty sure this is the wrong place for that, anyway. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: request for a mono vote.
In 4a6b45bf.5090...@yahoo.gr, aprekates wrote: I'm not saying to 'kick someone', i'm arguing about moving in non-free section. If it is to be removed from main for patent issues, it can't be distributed in non-free either. It would be in the same boat as MP3-encoding. So i think formally maybe you're right and its free software but if you step back and take other angles it's valid to argue seriously about mono being a nascent threat for Debian in many levels and not only in a strict interpretation of current license issues. While it is not trivial, it would be possible to drop mono from the archive, get out new ISOs for stable (and possibly oldstable), etc. in less than 2 weeks from the time any patent claim became active and pursued. If Debian took such quick action, a judge would be hard-pressed to penalize SPI. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: request for a mono vote.
O/H Gregory Seidman ??: On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 08:06:31PM +0300, ?? wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. This seems pretty clear: http://port25.technet.com/archive/2009/07/06/the-ecma-c-and-cli-standards.aspx http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft-moves-C-NET-CLI-to-community-license-helps-Mono/1246980965 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? That has nothing to do with Mono. Mono is not tied to MS in any way. The software has been implemented independently and under open source licenses (GPL, LGPL, and MIT X11, depending on which piece): http://www.mono-project.com/Mono,_a_technical_whitepaper#Mono_Licensing 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. I can't parse this sentence. Rather, I can't tell whether you are claiming that Debian should or should not have a clear position. It doesn't matter, of course, since Debian has a clear position on licensing, not software rivalries. Perl, Python, PHP, Ruby, TCL, etc. are all available in Debian main, as are a couple of Java interpreters. As long as they are under open source licenses and are unencumbered by patent threats (or stupid encryption export laws), they belong in main. +1 for a voting procedure. +1 for understanding the relevant patent licensing, code licensing, and Debian policy -1 for calling for a vote without that understanding I think you see the technical angle and not a broader concern that i tried to draw, maybe hastily , vaguely or not expert-legaly i admit. I see the fog of a middleware battle going on for decades and mono is the linux implementation of MS middleware . Also i dont see how Perl, PHP , Ruby , TCL are compared with the extent of a middlewe API like java,or .net. Do they provide the same functionality in scope ? Correct me , but i think that that argument is valid for java mainly. Not sure, but i think that java and .net are more ambitious than scripting languages , and programming languages . So i think it'be vary informative to draw a parallel about mono and java free implementations and discuss about merits ands risks for possibly default inclusion in debian and generally in dists. Finally forgive me for being suspicious about the benevolent monopolist who runs from court to court! .Dont expect me to sympathize with pro-ms pro-monopolist moves. chomwitt chomwitt --Greg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 13:36:43 +0300 aprekates apreka...@gmail.com wrote: O/H Gregory Seidman ??: On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 08:06:31PM +0300, ?? wrote: ... 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? That has nothing to do with Mono. Mono is not tied to MS in any way. The software has been implemented independently and under open source licenses (GPL, LGPL, and MIT X11, depending on which piece): http://www.mono-project.com/Mono,_a_technical_whitepaper#Mono_Licensing ... I think you see the technical angle and not a broader concern that i tried to draw, maybe hastily , vaguely or not expert-legaly i admit. I see the fog of a middleware battle going on for decades and mono is the linux implementation of MS middleware . Also i dont see how Perl, PHP , Ruby , TCL are compared with the extent of a middlewe API like java,or .net. Do they provide the same functionality in scope ? Correct me , but i think that that argument is valid for java mainly. Not sure, but i think that java and .net are more ambitious than scripting languages , and programming languages . So i think it'be vary informative to draw a parallel about mono and java free implementations and discuss about merits ands risks for possibly default inclusion in debian and generally in dists. Finally forgive me for being suspicious about the benevolent monopolist who runs from court to court! .Dont expect me to sympathize with pro-ms pro-monopolist moves. I'm not taking a position, but FWIW, here's Linus's perspective: “Oh, I’m a big believer in “technology over politics”. I don’t care who it comes from, as long as there are solid reasons for the code, and as long as we don’t have to worry about licensing etc issues. In fact, to some degree, I’d be more likely to include it because it’s from a new member of the community rather than less (again, I’d like to point out that drivers are special. They don’t impact other things, so they get merged much more easily than some core changes). I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease. I believe in open development, and that very much involves not just making the source open, but also not shutting other people and companies out. There are ‘extremists’ in the free software world, but that’s one major reason why I don’t call what I do ‘free software’ any more. I don’t want to be associated with the people for whom it’s about exclusion and hatred.” http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7439/1.html hat tip: http://linux.slashdot.org/story/09/07/25/1757253/Linus-Calls-Microsoft-Hatred-a-Disease Celejar -- mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 01:36:43PM +0300, aprekates wrote: O/H Gregory Seidman ??: On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 08:06:31PM +0300, ?? wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. This seems pretty clear: http://port25.technet.com/archive/2009/07/06/the-ecma-c-and-cli-standards.aspx http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft-moves-C-NET-CLI-to-community-license-helps-Mono/1246980965 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? That has nothing to do with Mono. Mono is not tied to MS in any way. The software has been implemented independently and under open source licenses (GPL, LGPL, and MIT X11, depending on which piece): http://www.mono-project.com/Mono,_a_technical_whitepaper#Mono_Licensing 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. I can't parse this sentence. Rather, I can't tell whether you are claiming that Debian should or should not have a clear position. It doesn't matter, of course, since Debian has a clear position on licensing, not software rivalries. Perl, Python, PHP, Ruby, TCL, etc. are all available in Debian main, as are a couple of Java interpreters. As long as they are under open source licenses and are unencumbered by patent threats (or stupid encryption export laws), they belong in main. +1 for a voting procedure. +1 for understanding the relevant patent licensing, code licensing, and Debian policy -1 for calling for a vote without that understanding I think you see the technical angle and not a broader concern that i tried to draw, maybe hastily , vaguely or not expert-legaly i admit. I see the fog of a middleware battle going on for decades and mono is the linux implementation of MS middleware . I don't think you understand what Mono is. It is an implementation of the Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) and the C# language as laid out in ECMA-335 and ECMA-334 (ISO/IEC 23271 and ISO/IEC 23270), respectively, plus a bunch of libraries including a GTK+/GNOME library (GTK#) and reimplementation of several .NET libraries, plus a few applications built for it. While the included .NET libraries do include MS-designed middleware (e.g. ASP.NET), they are not required to use Mono nor any of the GTK#-based GNOME applications. The applications included with the Mono distribution also generally do not require any reimplementations of Microsoft's non-standardized .NET libraries. Also i dont see how Perl, PHP , Ruby , TCL are compared with the extent of a middlewe API like java,or .net. Do they provide the same functionality in scope ? Correct me , but i think that that argument is valid for java mainly. Not sure, but i think that java and .net are more ambitious than scripting languages , and programming languages . So i think it'be vary informative to draw a parallel about mono and java free implementations and discuss about merits ands risks for possibly default inclusion in debian and generally in dists. Perl, Python, PHP, Ruby, and TCL are all languages with language runtimes, compilers/interpreters, and libraries, as are Java and the CLI. They are, indeed, similar in scope. In terms of risks, both (some implementations of) Java and (the standardized and GTK# portions of) Mono are entirely Free and free. There is no greater risk in including Mono or, say, OpenJDK than there is in including PHP or Perl. In terms of merits, there is a great deal of excellent FOSS built for all of the above, and it's desirable to be able to package and include that software in Debian as well. Finally forgive me for being suspicious about the benevolent monopolist who runs from court to court! .Dont expect me to sympathize with pro-ms pro-monopolist moves. Developing applications for Mono, especially when not relying on .NET libraries, has nothing to do with supporting Microsoft in any way. Running applications on Mono has nothing to do with supporting Microsoft. Your suspicion of Microsoft has nothing to do with Mono. You may weigh them differently depending on your values and needs, but the only reasonable things to judge software on are freedom, price, and quality. As long as your software freedoms are protected, as they are with Mono, all that's left are price and quality. The price is right (free), so it's just a question of quality, and Mono is high quality software. Furthermore, the design of the CLI and the C# language are excellent (though I'm not 100% thrilled with the design of the core library), regardless of
request for a mono vote.
As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. +1 for a voting procedure. chomwitt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
Πρεκατές Αλέξανδρος wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. None of these provide an argument for Mono itself being non-free. Unnamed and unexecuted threats of patent aggression don't count. So far as I know, the only cases where software is omitted from main for patent reasons is when they use patents for which infringement is actively being prosecuted (see MP3 encoding). This has not yet happened with Mono. The other issues are not relevant Software's inclusion should be based on the software itself, not organizations it may or may not be affiliated with. Otherwise Debian should kick out Samba too. I am not saying anything about the good or bad of Mono. I am merely stating that there is not sufficient cause to take it out of Debian main at this point given the historical precedents of Debian. And that there is not sufficient cause to expend bandwidth to have a vote on the matter. - Michael signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: request for a mono vote.
O/H Michael Ekstrand έγραψε: Πρεκατές Αλέξανδρος wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. None of these provide an argument for Mono itself being non-free. Unnamed and unexecuted threats of patent aggression don't count. So far as I know, the only cases where software is omitted from main for patent reasons is when they use patents for which infringement is actively being prosecuted (see MP3 encoding). This has not yet happened with Mono. The other issues are not relevant Software's inclusion should be based on the software itself, not organizations it may or may not be affiliated with. Otherwise Debian should kick out Samba too. I am not saying anything about the good or bad of Mono. I am merely stating that there is not sufficient cause to take it out of Debian main at this point given the historical precedents of Debian. And that there is not sufficient cause to expend bandwidth to have a vote on the matter. - Michael I'm not saying to 'kick someone', i'm arguing about moving in non-free section. Also i want to remind the USA vs Microsoft case. There judge Jackson spoke about nascent threats (referring to java+netscape middleware) . (In that case technicaly netscape wasnt an OS so no harm done from MS!). So i think formally maybe you're right and its free software but if you step back and take other angles it's valid to argue seriously about mono being a nascent threat for Debian in many levels and not only in a strict interpretation of current license issues. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 20:06 +0300, Πρεκατές Αλέξανδρος wrote:
As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries
regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in
non-free/main because:
1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues.
That's strategy, in the future a possible move - given a suitable
majority in the US supreme court - might be to prove open source
licenses are violating their *Constitution*.
2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive
behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see
netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm
the excellent name Debian has build?
Should it ever be necessary to go to court against m$, only ${deity}
knows the outcome and for sure m$ can hire better lawyers than the
oss community can ever afford.
3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to
has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals
companies not favoring or taking sides.
Sorry I don't grok what you are saying here.
+1 for a voting procedure.
Not yet decided, maybe I'll build a local dummy package marked
essential that conflicts with mono, effectively ruling out anything
that depends on mono. For now that's just an first idea, I still have
to work out the details.
Siggy
--
Please don't Cc: me when replying, I might not see either copy.
bsb-at-psycho-dot-informationsanarchistik-dot-de
or:bsb-at-psycho-dot-i21k-dot-de
O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: request for a mono vote.
On 2009-07-25 12:06, Πρεκατές Αλέξανδρος wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. +1 for a voting procedure. As a consumer of other people's free labor, you get NO vote. However, if you feel strongly about it, install popcon and mononono (from http://tim.thechases.com/mononono/). Or... switch from Debian to gNewSense. -- Scooty Puff, Sr The Doom-Bringer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 12:46 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: However, if you feel strongly about it, install popcon and mononono (from http://tim.thechases.com/mononono/). Thanks for the link, that almost what I have imagined. Still I have to investigate the implications of adding Essential: yes making effectively making it almost unremovable. Or... switch from Debian to gNewSense. If the 'g' means what I suspect, that's trading shackles for handcuffs. Thanks Siggy -- Please don't Cc: me when replying, I might not see either copy. bsb-at-psycho-dot-informationsanarchistik-dot-de or:bsb-at-psycho-dot-i21k-dot-de O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: request for a mono vote.
On 2009-07-25 13:14, Siggy Brentrup wrote: On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 12:46 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: However, if you feel strongly about it, install popcon and mononono (from http://tim.thechases.com/mononono/). Thanks for the link, that almost what I have imagined. Still I have to investigate the implications of adding Essential: yes making effectively making it almost unremovable. Or... switch from Debian to gNewSense. If the 'g' means what I suspect, that's trading shackles for handcuffs. Choose your poison. Or write it *all* yourself... -- Scooty Puff, Sr The Doom-Bringer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
O/H Ron Johnson έγραψε: On 2009-07-25 12:06, Πρεκατές Αλέξανδρος wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. +1 for a voting procedure. As a consumer of other people's free labor, you get NO vote. Sorry for the vote. . I mean an informal poll. But your remark is little aggresive and personal. Maybe i am what you claim but i'm not a proven monopolist having harmed the social well being with exclusionary conducts. Are you missing the big players here? However, if you feel strongly about it, install popcon and mononono (from http://tim.thechases.com/mononono/). I'm not passionate about it. Are u dispassionate about it? Did u try to look my angle ? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
Hi, On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 20:06 +0300, Πρεκατές Αλέξανδρος wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. Correct me if I am wrong, but Debian Testing now installs the meta package gnome-desktop-environment by default (and not gnome, which depends or recommends extra tools like gnome-office, gnumeric, abiword ... and banshee, tomboy [which depends on mono]) So the problem is over, isn't it? Franklin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 08:06:31PM +0300, ?? wrote: As a dedicated debian user i want to express my concerns and worries regarding mono inclusion in main and i ask for a vote for mono in non-free/main because: 1) I feel like microsoft is not clear about the license issues. This seems pretty clear: http://port25.technet.com/archive/2009/07/06/the-ecma-c-and-cli-standards.aspx http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft-moves-C-NET-CLI-to-community-license-helps-Mono/1246980965 2) MS is a monopoly in desktop OS market and its monopoly aggresive behavior has been proven in courts and is evident every day. see netbook market for example. Wouldnt a pro-ms pro-monopoly move harm the excellent name Debian has build? That has nothing to do with Mono. Mono is not tied to MS in any way. The software has been implemented independently and under open source licenses (GPL, LGPL, and MIT X11, depending on which piece): http://www.mono-project.com/Mono,_a_technical_whitepaper#Mono_Licensing 3) Is essential to me and the way i perceive the debian identity to has a clear position out of middleware rivalries of multinationals companies not favoring or taking sides. I can't parse this sentence. Rather, I can't tell whether you are claiming that Debian should or should not have a clear position. It doesn't matter, of course, since Debian has a clear position on licensing, not software rivalries. Perl, Python, PHP, Ruby, TCL, etc. are all available in Debian main, as are a couple of Java interpreters. As long as they are under open source licenses and are unencumbered by patent threats (or stupid encryption export laws), they belong in main. +1 for a voting procedure. +1 for understanding the relevant patent licensing, code licensing, and Debian policy -1 for calling for a vote without that understanding chomwitt --Greg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: request for a mono vote.
Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net writes: However, if you feel strongly about it, install popcon and mononono (from http://tim.thechases.com/mononono/). Thanks for the link! I've been wondering if there's a way to do that (in retrospect it's trivial, of course :). -Miles -- `The suburb is an obsolete and contradictory form of human settlement' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
