[Mono-winforms-list] Re: [Mono-hackers-list] Mono roadmap and .NET

Peter Dennis Bartok peter@novonyx.com
Wed, 29 Oct 2003 15:04:17 -0700

[Not sure about the crosspost hackers/winforms, but I'll keep it for now]

I have to agree with Jordi. We need something that people can use to build
GUI client applications. Today that's windows.forms; and since Longhorn
won't be released 'til 2006 windows.forms will continue to be it for the
next few years. I don't think it would be acceptable to not have
(cross-platform) GUI development means for people trying to use Mono until

Heck, I'm having a tough time letting go of Win32 and going to
Windows.Forms, I don't think it's any different for the developers out there
that are just now switching to Windows.Forms.


-----Original Message-----
From: "Jordi Mas" <jmas@softcatala.org>
To: "Miguel de Icaza" <miguel@ximian.com>
Cc: <mono-hackers-list@ximian.com>; <mono-winforms-list@lists.ximian.com>
Date: 29 October, 2003 11:47
Subject: Re: [Mono-hackers-list] Mono roadmap and .NET

>>     About Avalon, I will post a follow up message, but so far the big
>> open question from the PDC is whether we should invest at all in
>> Windows.Forms and EnterpriseServices.
>I only have read the information available in the on-line version of MSDN.
>sure that you guys have very hot information and had the opportunity to
>discuss about this with other people.
>I just want to give some random impressions:
>- It's clear that LongHorn and Avalon will not be release anytime soon and
>also the adoption of these new technologies, once they are release, will
>be overnight. Not many people in the short/medium term will have the
>system installed in its clients to run applications target for Avalon.
>- Mixing the .Net Framework and Avalon with no clear distinction will make,
>the medium term, that lots of Visual Basic-type of developers use both
>making a distinction or even without knowing it.
>- It's clear that dropping support for Avalon and Windows.Form will left
>as tool no good for client applications. I see supporting Windows.Form and
>Avalon different decisions. If we have Windows.Form you still will be able
>build client applications.
>- Supporting Avalon looks like a very big effort. Some of the stuff
>encapsulated by Avalon will not be implemented in Wine and I do not think
>will in the short time. Any effort supporting Avalon should be really
>coordinated with Wine.
>- There is the possibility of doing a partial Avalon implementation. For
>example, implementing support for XAML but not implementing functionality
>depends heavily in LongHorn.
>Looking forward to heard your impressions about that you have seen in the
>Best Regards,
>Jordi Mas i Hernāndez (homepage http://www.softcatala.org/~jmas)
>Mono-hackers-list maillist  -  Mono-hackers-list@lists.ximian.com