[Mono-list] Is Mono serious? Is Mono still alive?
stifu at free.fr
Fri Oct 30 13:03:59 EDT 2009
Mono is alive and kicking. Other than the number of posts here and on
monologue (http://www.go-mono.com/monologue/), which clearly shows Mono is
nowhere near dead (unlike, say, dotGNU), the gap between Mono 2.0 (last
year) and Mono 2.6 speaks volume about how fast things are moving.
1) I take it you saw roadmap? http://mono-project.com/Roadmap
As far as I know, other than WPF, pretty much everything in .NET is planned
for implementation in Mono.
The class status page (http://go-mono.com/status/) is also interesting,
although it doesn't tell you about future goals.
I believe Miguel said about a dozen of Novell devs worked on Mono (+
contributors), I don't know much other than that.
2-3) I agree about the lack of updated content / documentation... I believe
Olive (or part of it?) was merged with the main Mono branch at some point,
but I don't know the details.
4) I'd pick MonoDevelop over Eclipse, personally. Although less mature,
MonoDevelop is lighter and faster, and has just the features I need. It just
needs to be polished some more (stability improvements, bugs fixing, OS
parity by, for example, adding debugger support for everything on every
OS...). MonoDevelop has been worked on for years, and with the relatively
recent additions of debugging + Windows and OSX support, I guess the bulk of
the work has already been done. If MonoDevelop had only just been started, I
may agree with you, but MonoDevelop is there right now and already works
That said, that doesn't prevent Eclipse-enthusiasts from looking into Mono
with Eclipse, but I don't think Novell should bother at this point.
All of that said, few companies use (or even know) about Mono... which is a
shame. Hope that ends up changing.
> I don't want to stir up a hornets nest. It is my intent to see Mono as a
> strong enough offering to be able to recommend medium to large companies
> to commit to an Open technology stack that includes (and relies on) Mono.
> Forgive me if I am not well informed, I am definitely well intended.
> The following are issues that stop this from reaching any sort of reality:
> 1) There is no visible Mono timeline and release plan. What is Mono's
> intent and stated goals for the future? Will it try to maintain parity
> with Microsoft Dot.Net to some level, and if so what level and by what
> 1.1) What are mono's resources?
> 1.2) Who are mono's sponsors?
> 1.3) Are we resourcing up to maintain pace with our plans?
> 2) Many projects that should be enablers of achieving a reasonably parity
> with Microsoft Dot.Net have not been updated since Dec 2008 (such as
> Olive) If these are no longer strategic the thinking behind this should be
> made transparent.
> 3) The mono site has a mix of outdated pages statuses and some (very
> little) new content. I agree that the code is more important than the
> site, but it is less than professional to not date each page edit and
> structure the site so that the latest status and pages are always
> guaranteed to be clear and navigable. Please fix this.
> 4) Is mono executing the best strategy (as in - what is best for Mono and
> the Open Source community) by relying on Mono-Develop? Could we not
> implement (or at least explore) mono on Eclipse or Netbeans IDE's and
> concentrate our efforts instead on integrating to a fully mature IDE
> infrastructure instead of developing YAIDE from scratch without a
> snow-balls hope in hades of keeping up with the other IDE's? Just a
> thought. I suggest that the Mono-Project look into the other IDE's, it
> wont slow down Mono-Develop any and more choice would be good here.
> Thoughts? Ideas? Comments?
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Is-Mono-serious--Is-Mono-still-alive--tp26132878p26133629.html
Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the Mono-list