[MonoDevelop] Linux Distro to Use

[Richard Hendershot]

KDevelop and Mono are both in core so I certainly agree that MD should
as well be in core!

If users' request can be effective just provide a contact and I'd
happily ask, as would others I'm sure, they review any decision to leave
MD out in the cold.  With FC6T1 freeze only two weeks away,  it would be
nice to know that FC6 will include MD in a coherent form.  While waiting
for the fedora-core-5 go-mono downloads I tried building from source,
using your rpms, standing on my head.... ;)

RH has tied mono so deeply that most attempts would have resulted in
removal of core mono applications.  Any time this machine doesn't work I
start to have the DT's.... it's got my finances and TV captures and
whatnot.  I don't use force or nodeps on this one.  I'm sure there are
tricks I don't know.  Still, you see what I had to do to get it working.
In the past I'd built mono and its dependencies and applications all
from sources.  Having Mono in FC5 I thought would obviate that need.
But the generic MD sources conflict greatly with RH's idea of packaging
AFAICT.

But *today* is a good day.  It's all working.  There's a place to check
for the latest and greatest of MD and it will install and I know how to
clean it up.  And it's good stuff.

Until something changes....  it's never that simple, you got that
right!  :)

On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 15:35 +0100, PFJ wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> > While I'm at it...  Does anybody know why FedoraExtras didn't sync
> > with monodevelop as Fedora rolled out Mono with FC5?  It's clearly not
> > a technical issue since Paul Johnson provided at least one path (circa
> > monodevelop 0.10) and even these un-tuned rpms work well enough.  It's
> > been a couple of weeks since I checked on the progress of having
> > monodevelop in Extras, but it hasn't happened yet and FC6 Test1
> > release is just around the corner.  Odd.
> 
> Well, it's never quite that simple - and there is a MD-0.11 rpm sitting
> on my machine at home. Personally, I don't know why MD is a candidate
> for FE when it really should be in Core. I have a feeling that it's down
> to why RH accepted Mono. I certainly get a feeling it was taken somewhat
> grudgingly based on the number of people reviewing the packages (though
> they are slowly getting through!)
> 
> FC6t1 isn't just around the corner either - it's a month or so off!
> 
> Currently, gtksourceview-sharp and monodoc are being reviewed, though I
> do have boo and ikvm support built into my rpm of MD, so all 4 need
> approval before MD gets the go light.
> 
> TTFN
> 
> Paul
> 

-- 
Richard Hendershot <rshendershot at mchsi.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/monodevelop-list/attachments/20060524/f7315e41/attachment.html