Re: What's heppening to Debian? Mono?
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 02:08:39PM -0400, machiner wrote:
> All apologies, I posted this earlier to the wrong list.
<snip>
>
> And....WTF is this: $ aptitude search mono
>
> ......
>
> p libmono-microsoft-build2.0-cil - Mono Microsoft.Build libraries
> p libmono-microsoft7.0-cil - Mono Microsoft libraries
> p libmono-microsoft8.0-cil - Mono Microsoft libraries
>
>
> Doesn't anybody else think it's bad-medicine to be including
> potentially dangerous code in the default installation? I want to
> hear from devs that mono is free from potential liability. Do you
> know for sure? I am sure that there are others that are getting that
> queasy feeling in their stomachs about including mono in the default
> install.
You do know that Mono is not a Microsoft Product and its produced by
FLOSS programmer. So its free software. I like free software. Its
impementing an open standard. I like open standards. At least for now
there is no patent claims, but I expect the SFLC, the PFLC and others to
be on the look-out, So unless Gnome hacker are double-agents, there
should be no issues.
>
> It has been pointed out to me that Gnome now "needs" Tomboy. However,
> Tomboy has its own dependencies -- mono. Is Gnome still a good idea?
> Why not Xfce4?
I wouldn't consider that a conspiricy, I like tomboy, myself.
Debian also offers you other choices.
>
> And for a note-keeping application what's wrong with Notecase?
Well, you can certainly suggest it, if its not in Debian.
Consider an ITP (intent to package) request if you can program or an
RFP(request for package) otherwise.
-K
--
| .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: |
| : :' : The Universal |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/|
| `. `' Operating System | go to counter.li.org and |
| `- http://www.debian.org/ | be counted! #238656 |
| my keyserver: subkeys.pgp.net | my NPO: cfsg.org |
|join the new debian-community.org to help Debian! |
|_______ Unless I ask to be CCd, assume I am subscribed _______|
Reply to: