[Mono-list] Re: mono-hackers --> mono-devel-list
Mon, 3 Feb 2003 16:25:40 +0100
On 02/03/03 Adam Treat wrote:
> > Adam, this was already explained to you both on IRC an on this list.
> > The policy for inclusion is very easy: do something for mono. Miguel
> > has handed out subscriptions to the list and cvs accounts very
> > liberally.
> I have already 'done something for mono' in case you haven't noticed. Just
I know, that's the reason you were on the list in the first place,
nobody has ever denied that. In the same mail you replied to, I said you
helped mono since the beginning, trying to misrepresent my views won't
help your cause.
> > Your exclusion has very little to do with your interest in others CLRs
> > (pnet uses my own code and I'm still subscribed to mono-hackers:-).
> > The mono-hackers access is a matter of trust.
> > You lost the trust when you proposed to fork the code in the mono
> > assemblies.
> This again. I never proposed to fork the code despite your contentions to the
> contrary. Some more context ... one day while lurking in the Portable.NET
> IRC channel I asked about the status of Portable.NET's System.Xml. After
> receiving the answer that it was incapable of generating the Qt# bindings I
> suggested that Portable.NET use Mono's System.Xml instead of duplicating the
[07:23] <t3rmin4t0r> we could use other licenses outside pnetlib
[07:23] <t3rmin4t0r> or fork mono's System.Xml
[07:23] <manyoso> well, mono's System.Xml is X11 so we should be able to
relicense it with GPL+Linking
[07:24] <manyoso> yah, i think that sounds good
[07:25] <manyoso> i think forking System.Xml is a good idea, but then
we'd also want to patch as mono's System.Xml is improved
I'm not a native english speaker, but in the free software world the
word 'fork' has a very precise meaning. When you also talk about
relicensing the forked code with an incompatible license, that means that
fixes and enhancements can't be folded back: this is as bad a fork as you
> effort. This is entirely analogous (as I've pointed out to you and to Miguel
> in numerous conversations and have yet to hear a reason why this is
> considered 'forking') to Mono's inclusion of Portable.NET's I18N libraries.
No, it's completely different. The I18N code was kindly donated by Rhys
under the X11 license: the code is not forked. In mono we have just a
copy and we send back to Rhys all the changes done there (that aren't
irrelevant to him, such as integration in the mono build setup).
We're not relicensing the code to make it incompatible with the pnet
> In fact, Miguel has publicly stated that Portable.NET, DotGNU, Rotor, Intel,
> Evil Company are all welcome to work on and use Mono's class libraries (this
The license allows that. The license doesn't allow them to pretend to
have access to the mono-hackers list.
> was the reason stated for the X11 license change) so I find this issue of
> 'forking' to be dubious. Anyways, I've asked for clarification on what
> Miguel would like done WRT System.Xml and have explained that I never wished
> to 'fork' any of Mono's libraries and this has been met with near silence.
We talked about this on IRC and you said your words (quoted above) have
been misunderstood (despite them being quite clear in the meaning).
But once you loose trust on some people, it takes some
effort to gain it back, it's not as simple as saying that what you said
was not what you wanted to say. And instead of patches, bug reports,
suggestions and the like, what did we get? Flamewars on mono-list :-(
> > The fact is, though, that since then, you have done
> > _nothing_ to regain the trust.
> Why should I continue to contribute when it is so readily apparent that Miguel
> is interested in excluding me completely.
Miguel doesn't want you excluded, he even told you on IRC that if you
start contributing again it would raise significantly the priority of
setting up the mono-devel list and making it an effective list
for mono developers.
> I have not seen Mono do _anything_ to regain my trust.
Mono doesn't exist as a person, so I'm not sure what that would mean.
If I lost your trust, let me know privately what I should do to gain it
back (hey, if you ever travel near Venice or Padua here in
Italy, be sure to send me mail and we'll share a bottle of wine:-).
If you have similar issues with someone else in the project, do it
privately, a public mailing list is not the best medium for settling
personal issues. If you can't reconcile the positions, ignore
some people and carry on with your contributions, like many people do
in large projects.
email@example.com Monkeys do it better