[Mono-list] Java, Mono, or C++.. by HP
Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:45:34 +0530
On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 23:47, Alex Combas wrote:
> As no doubt some of us have already read:
> Havoc just released an article describing the
> important decision that Opensource is facing of what
> Managed World(tm) we will all adopt.
> In doing so he gave Mono a real black eye and I think
> we need to stand up and defend ourselves or risk
> loosing a lot.
> It is sad for me to see that the discussion got off to
> such a bad start, but Im sure that Havoc was only
> trying to be realistic.
> But still, it is sad to see that he says he is
> attempting to open the lines of discussion and then
> promptly bashes everything except gcj and classpath.
> We need to start advocating our platform, we need to
> start voicing ourselves. A lot is at stake here. We
> _must_ act.
Let's face it. Only voicing ourselves is not going to help. Havoc has
brought out some very solid points and a stark reality too. Mono (as of
now) is not clear of legal doubts and Sun won't open source Java. If you
follow some latest news on Sun/Java, you'll find some interesting
things. Sun and M$ are competing for market-hold through Java/.NET
because that's their way to big money. What remains as options now are:
(1) GCJ or (2) Mono/IKVM. It's really a tough decision to take at this
juncture. Significant portions of both Java and .NET are still
proprietary, which have no open-source alternatives. This is what gives
Sun and M$ the impetus to wield managed-platforms monopoly.
The ideal solution might be open-source community having its own
managed-platform which is adaptive of Java and .NET. Or maybe some kind
of standard through which multiple managed-platforms can co-exist and
inter-operate. But that's far from realistic and in all likelihood, that
is not going to happen (at least anytime soon).
> Personally, I think Havoc was taking a very
> black/white approach to things.
> But why does the GNOME core really need to be mutually
> exclusive when viewing gcj or Mono? Isnt there room
> for both? doesn't opensource thrive due to it's
> genetic diversity.
> I understand the argument he makes, and I realize that
> integrating both gcj and Mono would be more than twice
> as much work as implementing either one alone. However
> by finding a way to integrate both Worlds(tm) we would
> not only be safer (by not putting all our eggs in one
> basket) but also more advanced.
> Ok, so now it sounds like I have no idea what Im
> talking about (and probably dont :P) because
> implementing both systems is impossible, right?
> Yes, as things stand currently I admint it would be
> hard to impossible.
> < uninformed_and_idealistic_rant >
> We would need to get _everyone_ onboard and
> re-engineer the entire desktop into a truely component
> based system (this should be done regardless of which
> Managed World(tm) ends up being integrated). If the
> entire platform were truely and completely component
> based then I think there would be room for both
> Managed Worlds(tm) and developers could choose to
> target which ever they feel more comfortable with.
> Win, win.
> </ uninformed_and_idealistic_rant >
> Further more, Havoc sites the problem of a possible
> fork if Mono is chosen and sites the legal limbo
> quagmire that we are currently wallowing in as the
> reason for it.
> How is that legal review coming?
> Do we have a time line?
> And finally, I think that if a fork were to take place
> (by Novel choosing to go it alone and integrate Mono
> into the core of its Ximian Desktop) that we would
> survive the storm and eventually we would prevail. I
> think Mono has the critical mass needed in order to
> weather a fork-storm, although I really hope we dont
> need to fork.
> Please, please, please, please do not sit idly by and
> watch as a Mono based desktop is yanked out of our
> reach. We need action. Lots of it.
As a GNOME fan, I'd love to see GNOME scaling heights. I am sure neither
the Java folks nor the Mono community is going to be silent over it.
Time will tell better, perhaps. :-)
In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?