Does Mono even matter anymore these days?
8 07 2009
I may surprise many of the readers of this blog, but as the title puts it, this blog is about how Mono does not matter anymore. Actually, I believe it stopped mattering 24 hours ago. But let me go back quickly on the last weeks and the come-back of Mono in the debates of the Free Software community.
It started with one Debian developer explaining why he thought Mono was a pretty good choice technologically-wise and not at all the patent-trap that those extremist punks with beards usually think it is. Actually I enjoyed reading this blog (for all the links check out OSNews and BoycottNovell) as it was very credible at least on one point: Mono is, for the best or the worst, essentially important for Gnome developers. Very few developments happen with Mono as the gateway from the Windows environment to the Linux one, and the ones that did happen have so far never been conclusive. Mono is very much present inside Gnome, pushed and shoved by Miguel De Icaza and Novell who seem to work hard at making Linux the constant second platform behind Windows (Why will remain up to everyone to figure out). So instead of having become this “Switzerland” of software platforms, Mono became a sub-level glue for Gnome, while being judged legally unsecure except by its own authors.
But let’s go back to the blogosphere. The discussion started once again, but this time with an acute political intensity, which prompted several major distributions to make a public statement about the Mono issue. Fedora/Red Hat (the other big Gnome contributor) decided to scrap Mono out of its own Gnome in its upcoming releases, Debian stuttered and then didn’t decide anything, while Canonical took a pragmatic stance and declared that if someone had a patent on Mono, that someone should better come out in public and stop the fearmongering. Add to this a comical episode about TomBoy and Gnote that illustrates well the Mono dependency hell: why code light when you can code with Mono?
… And all of the sudden the elephant in the room, aka Microsoft, started making a strange, rumbling noise in the background.
Microsoft essentially declared that most of the Mono core was clean by publishing its community promise on CLI and the C# language. Is that good news? It is good news because it’s always good to know that Microsoft is embracing competition and openness. Their promise is pretty good, although it does not clear up GPL implementations from any threat. Some of my readers will think that I can never be satisfied, but here’s the thing: I’m reading the FAQs, and as much as I have to say that there is progress, we’re still not there yet.And by the way; Bob Sutor and many others would love to see the same kind of promise applied to Linux, it would not hurt anyone.
Anyway, who should care about this? Gnome developers mostly. The rest of us have gone out of the .Net and Java wars after around 2004 or 2005, and have realized that there other realities such as Qt and Python (to name just a few), and most of all, there is the Internet, and the POSH (Plain Old Simple Html), and that new little Linux distributions launched by Google… And so much more.
Mono and .Net is one of the last schemes from an outdated behemoth; both the scheme and its inventor will soon fade in blissful irrelevance. It does not mean it cannot sting back though….
For someone that has “gone out of the .NET and Java wars around 2004 or 2005″ you sure seem to be interested in continuing the battle.
For a technology that does not matter, you sure spent a lot of words attacking it
No I’m not. I’m just quite interested in seeing how Mono has been continuously pushed by some people who are usually less anonymous than you are.
Isn’t it a strange coincidence MS did just as the Mono topic became so hard lately?
What’s up with these “promises” though are they legally binding? I.e. can we sue Microsoft if they suddenly decide to break the promise?
I meant “MS did this* just..”
Reading the FAQ it would appear they decided to turn Mono from a legal threat to Linux to a new source of anti-GPL FUD.
But at least
Sounds good. Not like the FAQ and the actual legal interpretation MS would give to the promise are necessarily in accordance.
Mono may not have gotten irrelevant with this, but what really seems less relevant is the MS-Novell deal… MS is basically giving the Mono protection to everyone for free (or at least stating so). Is this me or does this mean Novell is now paying for nothing?
[…] opines that Mono does not even matter these days. Anyway, who should care about this? Gnome developers […]
Dear Charles,
A) The promises and other legal models are premature. Irrespective of legal effects they are mostly social contracts, and ought to be expected to be effective *)
B) If there was a strong Java competitor we would find more legal certainty provided for the remaining parts of the .NET platform technologies. RedHat invested in Java technologies, and they invest in Mono-free technologies now. Gnote is only one example.
C) Do you know that through Tomboy as a Gnome dependency Mono became a part of the “Lenny” release? Yes, Mono is part of the holy grail. That explains the recent uproar among the grail lords and the curses of a crazy evangelist.
D) Novell was paid to buy indemnification. That is something entirely different and good for sales bonuses on both sides. I am curious what indemnification models Novell signed themselves for their own code? They did, no?
E) Google Chrome OS. So far Vapourware, but it is technically feasible in no time and the public can connect the dots. A bit like the OO.org PIM suite.
* Geeks think: “How does this door locker prevent hand granade attacks?” The truth is, no, it does not. Not at all. We ought to be so afraid.