[Mono-dev] Arguing for reconsideration of WONTFIX status of 425512

Miguel de Icaza miguel at novell.com
Thu Feb 12 17:06:37 EST 2009


   I added some comments to the bug, we can apply Robert's patch and
encourage developers in the meantime to use the graceful fallback setup
for now as it will be needed for anyone trying to run the software on
any Mono versions pre-2.6 (as this fix wont make it into Mono until Mono


> Hey Miguel,
> > It seems to me that talking to upstream developers and get them to 
> > provide a more robust implementation from the get-go would be a much 
> > better outcome.   Have them probe for .NET version, fall back to Mono 
> > and if none of those are available, gracefully degrade the functionality.
> This should defenitely happen, and we're talking to the upstream 
> developers to deal with this situation in a better way.
> The main theme of my message is not how to get these 3 projects from 
> running on mono, but if we can make the N others
> that we do not know about run on mono as well.
> I'm not advocating for _not_ implementing more proper behaviour upstream.
> > I did not get the feeling (or maybe it is part of my lost email) that 
> > I have heard the "againsts" yet.
> So far I think it can be summarized as:
> 1)  It takes nonzero time, and there are a zillion more important things 
> to do.
> 2)  It could break projects that are mono-only and rely on the same hack.
> 3)  In the original comment on the bugzilla issue, it was noted that the 
> "field is shared with the runtime", and that
>      that would make a fix ugly.
> I actually think #1 is a good argument against,  #2 is not very likely, 
> but not totally impossible either, and to what extent #3 is a problem,
> I don't know.
> Bye, Lucas

More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list