[Mono-list] mono / .net framework 1.1 / roadmap
Wed, 12 Feb 2003 17:05:09 -0500
<Argh! I accidentally replied directly to Chris and not the list>
Let me start by stating that I haven't tried running anything under Mono
yet, so I could be way off base here.
There's actually a pretty good article on running multiple versions of the
It goes into a little more detail about what runtime the app will try to use
under different conditions, and how to force it to use a particular version
by tweaking config files. I would imagine that Mono would take advantage of
the binding redirection they mention to make the app think it's running on a
1.0-compatible runtime. You're right about 1.1-specific features, though -
if my app was compiled against 1.1 and uses 1.1-specific features, I won't
be able to un my app under Mono until Mono catches up. However, that issue
is familiar to many developers: don't use new features unless 100% of your
clients have access to them (or you happen to like lots of support phone
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Turchin" <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 3:03 PM
Subject: [Mono-list] mono / .net framework 1.1 / roadmap
> Having just read the overview for MS's .NET framework 1.1beta, I was
> wondering what the Mono teams's position is regarding such further
> technology developments like this.
> I don't mean with regards to the specific new features like
> System.Data.Oracle etc. but more in general, for example, whether the
> development on a 1.0 mono will continue regardless of changes brought
> about in 1.1 or if there is even a correlation here. Is there a roadmap
> related to the development of mono in relation to the development of the
> .NET framework in general?
> I am also wondering to what extent people see this development as another
> MS attempt to keep things incompatitible. In particular, I am troubled by
> the following statement:
> * If an application written with the .NET Framework 1.1 Beta is installed
> on a system with only the .NET Framework 1.0 Redistributable, it will not
> run (unless configured to do so).
> Am I reading too much into that statement? Probably... ;-) There is not
> even a mention of mono - but to me it sounds like as soon as 1.1 gains
> acceptance, any apps developed with it would no longer run with mono
> (which would make sense, assuming they are using 1.1 specific features,
> but not necessarily in general - although "if configured to do so" it
> might work either way...).
> I dunno... its all starting to get pretty confusing to me, what seemed
> so simple and elegant at first... Interested in hearing all of your
> feedback on the issue.
> Best Regards,
> Mono-list maillist - Monofirstname.lastname@example.org