[Mono-list] Surveys: Mono 1.0 and Mono Conference.

Shawn Vose svose@programmerforrent.com
09 Oct 2003 20:56:23 -0400

I agree! Additionally it would be nice to get developers that have done
development exclusively on the windows platform to make the transition
to Linux and see the potential the os and mono have.

On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 16:27, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 05:24, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> > 
> >    I want to query the community, and find out about two things:
> > 
> > 	* What should Mono 1.0 be?
> I think the major question is "who is Mono 1.0 for?".
> Is the purpose to target more of the same kind of people who have
> already found Mono, or is it to extend the Mono-awareness in other
> groups as well? If the latter is desirable, a "1.0" tag can always be
> used to attract the press, which can in turn cause the word to spread to
> places it hasn't yet reached -- which in turn can raise expectations...
> (I'm thinking Windows users here, but also people who are looking for an
> alternative to Java or for a good framework to extend Unix/Linux who
> haven't yet discovered Mono.)
> If Mono 1.0 is difficult to use and grasp, and if it causes
> disappointment to the people who have never seen it before the 1.0
> release, then a great opportunity has been lost.
> For everyone who is already using Mono, a version tag of 1.0 will hardly
> make any difference if the functionality you need is there. To these
> people, it's Just A Number (or it should be, anyway).
> I think it's actually not so much about what subset of .NET to release,
> and more about making sure that what is released is usable in practise,
> is of the highest quality, and that the release is accompanied with a
> message that helps potential users to have the right mind set when
> looking at the product.
> I second the opinion that documentation is of very high importance -- it
> is part of the message telling what Mono 1.0 is, and what it isn't
> (yet).
> To conclude, Mono 1.0 should be high-quality, as stable as possible, as
> well documented as possible, and it should contain the pieces that are
> needed for Unix/Linux hackers as well as people coming from a Windows or
> Java background to start building things with as little adaptation
> needed for the tool change as possible. As if this weren't everybody's
> wish list, anyway :)
> Cheers,