EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

01.31.08

Wake Up Already, GNOME, Please Wake Up

Posted in Deception, GNOME, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Mono, Patents at 10:47 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

That whole Mono entanglement [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33] seems to be getting worse all the time, but almost nobody cares to notice. GNOME developers think we are harsh and try to shoot the messenger, but all we are trying to do is help by drawing attention to the problem. It won’t go away if you ignore it.

Inspired by something in BoycottNovell, Beranger.org (formerly Beranger on GNOME) summarises the latest issue fairly well:

Soon, it will be IMPOSSIBLE to “unMonofy” your GNOME, as once you will get rid of Tomboy, F-Spot, Beagle, Banshee, Muine, Telepathy, whatever, you won’t be able to remove Mono, as it will be required as a GNOME system library!

Yesterday, before the analysis from Beranger.org, we passed evidence on to a knowledgeable figure arguing that Jeff Waugh had promised this would not happen. We received the following response:


Can you send a link to a public page where Waugh makes that assurance? If so, I can try to make sure it gets some mileage.

It’s one thing I never learned as a kid and have no idea how to go about trying: how do deal with bull*****ers like Waugh, who even as they are speaking you know they are lying or have no intent of following through but courtesy and protocol otherwise require accepting the statements at face value.

One solution is to nip the mono and excise all MS tech from GNOME. A second, in parallel, is to low-key, calmly and quietly insist on KDE and Fluxbox, especially in popular distros like Ubuntu and Fedora.


For context, see this thread in the GNOME Foundation’s mailing list. This long discussion was started by Richard Stallman, who happened to be aware of our work. Therein you’ll find claims that GNOME does not depend on Mono. Jeff made that claim repeatedly in this site, but it would take some digging to find several individual examples because he left about a hundred comments.

“GNOME is apparently becoming Mono-dependent, which is a shame.”Our contact later added: “If you come across anything showing the discrepancy between word and deed, that would be very useful.”

It is, by this stage, becoming clearer that Jeff Waugh’s promise was not trustworthy. GNOME is apparently becoming Mono-dependent, which is a shame. We saw that coming.

Remember that Mono is a Novell project and only Novell customers receive so-called 'protection' for the use Mono (due to expire in January 2012). Need we even start to wonder again why the ‘Novell part’ part of the GNOME Foundation supports OOXML and even helps it? Remember that Microsoft pays Novell to support OOXML. So, Novell seems to have resorted to fear as a strategy for selling itself and it’s poisoning GNOME for everybody else who uses it. The image below is a depiction of Novell. Please address this problem before it becomes truly irreversible.

Unless our assertion is wrong, we deserve some apologies from various people, including Jeff, for smears claiming that we were wrong.

A bad penguin -- Novell

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

40 Comments

  1. Jeff Waugh said,

    February 1, 2008 at 9:42 am

    Gravatar

    Yes, your assertion is wrong. You and your reference clearly have no solid technical understanding of the GNOME project, or the sense to actually do research. Stated before and stated often.

    But instead of fixing the problem, you’re resorting to personal attribution to try to make a point (at no point did I make any kind of promise about projects I do not control — what a preposterous notion and mistruth!).

    Have you considered that informed research and dissemination of actual truths might make your points better? The answer still appears to be “no”.

    Go away, Roy.

  2. Jeff Waugh said,

    February 1, 2008 at 9:44 am

    Gravatar

    There is no “Novell part” of the GNOME Foundation, and the GNOME Foundation does not “support” or endorse OOXML. Again, more mistruths on Boycott Novell to raise fear, uncertainty and doubt about Free Software projects and participants.

  3. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 1, 2008 at 10:48 am

    Gravatar

    Go away, Roy.

    As a part-time GNOME user with history as a developer with GTK, I wish not to go away but to make the problem go away.

    There is no “Novell part” of the GNOME Foundation

    Yes, there is. The two intersect. People have dual commitments. GNOME’s president for many years was also a vice president at Novell, for starters.

    You’ll have to give more convincing answers, Jeff.

  4. Ross said,

    February 1, 2008 at 11:25 am

    Gravatar

    Wow, massive misunderstanding here.

    GNOME 2.22 added libndesk-dbus as an external dependency, for use by *Mono applications*. Note *Mono applications*. If you don’t build any Mono applications, then you don’t need libdesk-dbus. libndesk-dbus is useless if you don’t use Mono, because its 100% Mono code. Thats the entire point of libndesk-dbus: it is a pure-Mono implementation of the DBus protocol — just like libdbus is a pure-C implemention of the DBus protocol — and makes using DBus easier and simplier in Mono applications.

  5. Béranger said,

    February 1, 2008 at 11:48 am

    Gravatar

    This is valid for GNOME 2.22, which is almost here. But what we will have in 6 months from now? In 12 months?

    Generally speaking, why should we believe that you’re at the same time:

    (1) so very much interested in providing all the back-ends integration for all the possible Mono apps (Tapioca, Landell, VMX Manager, LAT, Babuine, Chatter, Novell Banter, whetever);

    (2) so very scrupulous to maintain GNOME’s independence of Mono?

    At some point, a small dependency will make the whole GNOME dependent of Mono! The question is not “IF”, but “WHEN”!

    If you wanted to keep GNOME free of reimplementations of Microsoft technologies, you would have developed your Gtk# apps *outside* of the GNOME Project, not *inside*!

    BTW, if you wanted to say that all the stuff like NotifySharp, gnome-keyring-sharp, etc. are to be only used with C# apps and under no circumstances would the regular C-based libraries be jeopardized, you could have used “WRAPPER” instead of “REPLACEMENT” in your GUADEC presentation.

    Why don’t you reimplement the whole GNOME environment as a separate project instead of screwing GNOME?

  6. Béranger said,

    February 1, 2008 at 11:50 am

    Gravatar

    CORRECTION to “Why don’t you reimplement the whole GNOME environment as a separate project instead of screwing GNOME?”

    It was about a reimplementation in Mono, obviously. You could call it Monome.

  7. Ross said,

    February 1, 2008 at 11:55 am

    Gravatar

    I’m not sure who the “you” you are referring to. They appear to be very powerful, not only can they write Alp’s slides, but they also are reimplementing GNOME.

    You may have noticed that GNOME is an inclusive project, any project with some relation to GNOME is allowed to use the GNOME svn server, bugzilla, etc. Just because a project has files on the GNOME svn server doesn’t make it an official GNOME project. The GNOME Desktop and Platform module sets clearly state what is “officially” GNOME. The Mono apps you dislike so much all use gtk#, so have a reason to use the GNOME resources.

    libndesk-dbus isn’t a wrapper, libhal-sharp isn’t a wrapper, NotifySharp isn’t a wrapper. gnome-keyring-sharp isn’t a wrapper. The entire point is that they are *not* wrappers. There are existing C# wrappers for the C libraries and they prove to be tricky to integrate and maintain, thus it is easier to write C# ones.

    I’ll re-iterate my point again. The C# implementations of these utility libraries are 100% entirely totally useless outside of a C# application. Really, this is such a non-issue its amazing.

  8. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 1, 2008 at 12:07 pm

    Gravatar

    Ross, I think you guys are very good — should we say — at escaping trivialities. You’re avoiding a very key issue which is the fact that C# development in GNOME is increasingly encouraged. And what about Moonlight? Tell me. I won’t use it. What will Microsoft say? “Silverlight has Linux ‘support’”. Why? Because Novell, Microsoft’s own protege for the GPL, has something half-baked? Because Miguel has attended Microsoft events and he does little favours for them (and no, the OOXML debate isn’t over)?

    Saying that GNOME does not depend on Mono is becoming somewhat similar to saying you don’t depend on water because you are not thirsty at the moment. Tell me something: do you reckon that Yahoo will feature Silverlight everywhere, just like microsoft.com is intended to be? Don’t have your head buried in the sand. I, for one, know what is going on. Your spin won’t stop this.

  9. Ross said,

    February 1, 2008 at 12:10 pm

    Gravatar

    “C# development in GNOME is increasingly encouraged”. By Miguel and other — gasp — C# users, yes. You’ll notice that Miguel doesn’t control GNOME.

  10. Béranger said,

    February 1, 2008 at 12:10 pm

    Gravatar

    > any project with some relation to GNOME is allowed to use the GNOME svn server

    Really? I can’t see Anjuta there.

    Let me tell you how things work with you, the new generation of GNOME guys:

    – Atomix was born in 2001 or earlier. It was proposed to enter as an official GNOME game for GNOME 2.13.2 (see http://www.osnews.com/thread?61146, http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-91334.html, http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/teams/releng/2.13.2/gnome-2.13.2.modules). Instead, it was *refused*, and in the meantime the page that existed at http://www.gnome.org/projects/atomix was removed!

    – Anjuta was born in 2000. We’re now in 2008 and there are still discussions on whether it should be part of the GNOME project or not.

    – Mono was born… oh, no. You know better.

    > The Mono apps you dislike so much all use gtk#, so have a reason to use the GNOME resources.

    No, they don’t. Gtk# is not part of GNOME, and its homepage is at the Mono Project: http://www.mono-project.com/GtkSharp

  11. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 1, 2008 at 12:17 pm

    Gravatar

    By Miguel and other — gasp — C# users, yes. You’ll notice that Miguel doesn’t control GNOME.

    Brilliant. The anarchy that comes from .NET developers taking over GNU/Linux (or at least a desktop environment) and bending it to suit their own conveniences, regardless of the needs of many users, some of whom know nothing about Mono and patents (they just use it obliviously). What will be the future?

  12. Victor Soliz said,

    February 1, 2008 at 5:33 pm

    Gravatar

    I think that something no one (I hope) can deny is that gnome’s default applications dependant on MONO are increasing. The mere fact that they exist is a point of concern to me, cause for a project like gnome (free open software that has no distribution issues since there are packagers interested in gnome everywhere), relying on an unnecessary, yet risky technology for main apps does not make any sense.

    Right now it looks like although you don’t need MONO to run gnome, you need MONO to use gnome to its full default capabilities, and this looks as harmful to me.

  13. Jeff Waugh said,

    February 1, 2008 at 6:00 pm

    Gravatar

    Victor: This is not the case, no matter what the technically inept and misinformed reporters at this site would wish you to believe.

    Sure, there are plenty of applications coming out that have been written in C#, with Mono’s GTK+/GNOME bindings. Similarly, there are plenty of applications being written in Python with its GTK+/GNOME bindings. Developers hack with what they like and know. That’s not surprising at all.

    There is only one Mono-based application included in the regular GNOME release: Tomboy. This has been the case for a few releases now. Nothing has changed on that front, nor on the “repeated, misinformed reporting from Boycott Novell” front. :-)

    And, as has always been the case, you can fully use GNOME (as released by upstream) without Mono installed at all. While some distributions might wedge Mono stuff into their system utilities, certainly Ubuntu and Fedora do not. So on popular, modern distros, you can also remove Mono completely and continue to use GNOME without interruption.

    Those who say otherwise are either lying to you, are fundamentally misinformed, unable to do their own research, or have no interest in admitting that their bizarre claims are in fact wrong. :-)

    If Roy prefers to cite irrelevancies (that have already been very clearly dealt with) such as “Miguel was the GNOME Foundation president” instead of actually doing useful research, then his readers suffer for it. I’ve tried to help in many different ways and on many occasions, but ultimately only Roy can fix his problem with truth and paranoia.

  14. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 1, 2008 at 7:47 pm

    Gravatar

    If Roy prefers to cite irrelevancies (that have already been very clearly dealt with) such as “Miguel was the GNOME Foundation president”

    Since when is presidency a case of irrelevance? Since you called Miguel an embarrassment (or something along those lines)? For all I can tell, I can trust your word as much as some others in GNOME do. Last month, in this Web site, Rodney Dawes said:

    Jeff. Please. You aren’t GNOME. You’re just one of the “people” in it. Plenty of people appreciate my commentary. While you aren’t one of them, please do not go slandering like you are speaking for the entire community. There are just as many people who don’t appreciate your input, output, or anything else about you either.

    But whatever. You know the truth. Those who see short, fall far. But have fun trying to mock me some more. I’m sure your insults will be very professional and appear in other blog comments across the internet as well.”

    Had it came from an anonymous poster. I’d ignore, but it seems to me like I ought to take your word with a grain of salt. Two separate people independently advised me to.

    So on popular, modern distros, you can also remove Mono completely and continue to use GNOME without interruption.

    IIRC, in Windows 98, it was still somehow possible to remove Internet Explorer. How many people did this?

  15. Jeff Waugh said,

    February 1, 2008 at 9:55 pm

    Gravatar

    The situation regarding Miguel’s presidency has already been explained, and is clearly irrelevant to the activities of the GNOME Foundation. You keep bringing it up in order to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt, rather than represent any kind of useful information or truth of the situation.

    I’m not concerned about what Rodney says about me. I am entirely comfortable with my position in GNOME, and the respect that I have earned among a very broad majority of members of the project. Those who work in public roles get a lot of crap from time to time, and I’m used to it.

    Finally, you compare GNOME/Mono with Windows/IE, which demonstrates your inability to understand the technology, or embrace the facts of the matter. I really do wish you’d grow up and stop promoting such divisive misinformation and crap.

  16. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 1, 2008 at 10:23 pm

    Gravatar

    The analogy wasn’t intended to be a perfect one, but the fact remains that with IE delivered as part of the O/S, it gained enough market share to make a proprietary WWW you cannot enter without IE. Enter Silverlight… errr… I mean Moonlight (Mono).

  17. Woods said,

    February 4, 2008 at 1:25 am

    Gravatar

    >I’ll re-iterate my point again. The C# implementations of these utility >libraries are 100% entirely totally useless outside of a C# application. >Really, this is such a non-issue its amazing.

    Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the whole point of eg. libbeagle to offer a C/Python API to a C# application (Beagle)?

    Granted, it is only a single C library to a single Mono application but it raises a nasty spectre of a future where core Gnome components would be written with Mono and a small C-lib would be provided for legacy apps/libs.

  18. Béranger said,

    February 4, 2008 at 5:01 am

    Gravatar

    Have you noticed this?
    http://open-source-facts.blogspot.com/2008/02/latest-gnome-fud.html

  19. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 4, 2008 at 5:21 am

    Gravatar

    I haven’t seen this yet, thanks for pointing that out.

    The direction of this concerns the mind. Let’s see how long for de Icaza can claim that this infatuation with Mono is nothing to worry about ( http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/6232/1/ ).I hope that I’m wrong and that GNOME will never become MONOME. At the moment, most people receive Mono _out of the box_. They actually have to actively remove it if they do not want it (kind of like Windows Media Player in Windows).

  20. Victor Soliz said,

    February 4, 2008 at 7:26 am

    Gravatar

    That linuxplanet article is one for laughs and tears.”Some dislike the fact that Java isn’t capable of integrating with a system’s GUI” . I think windows.forms is much worse than swing in the aspect that it is not even safe from ECMA patent cloak, can’t just bind GTK to Java, I know QT is binded to Java alread.

    But the jewel here is:

    All politics aside, there are some who just want to use what they consider the best technology to do the job.

    An MS-technology/patents dependent framework is NOT the best tool for the job when the job is to make open source applications for the default gnome desktop.

  21. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 4, 2008 at 7:41 am

    Gravatar

    I suspect this article from Linux Planet had its headline changed recently. Let me check quickly.

    Yes, indeed. I’ve just checked the links in here and it’s pretty safe to say that a few weeks/months ago, Miguel or somebody else from GNOME told the editors to change the headline (maybe the body as well) of this article. It used to say something about GNOME being rewritten in Mono. At the time, RMS was very concerned about this article. He proceeded to asking Miguel to explain his motives, IIRC. There was also a clarification (damage control) in LinuxToday. I’d have to check the details and research this better when time permits it. It’s intent and deed combined that will give us some answers.

    To quote an E-mail I received on Saturday:

    [about friendly acquaintances with de Icaza:]

    Don’t confuse words with deeds, especially claimed intent. How familiar are you with “Coyote” legends, from your part of the country more or less? Or known ‘kind’ people who manage to turn everything around them to shit?

    [...]

    Again to dismiss or minimize the problem by framing it as one of emotions furthers the harm. If you mean that the anger is caused by Miguel’s and Bruce’s [Lowry] apparent efforts to subvert, block or undermine FOSS, then that’s correct. But it might be more accurate to address the problem behavior itself – the undermining and subversion.

    To single out Miguel, perhaps he really is so tarded, dumb or naive, that he thinks FOSS will somehow come out ahead by copying M$ broken, proprietary gimmicks into their systems without written assurances of approval. But at the end of the day it matters not what he thinks, besides we cannot know what he thinks. We can only see the results of his actions and these have been consistently bad. c.f. recent debate over backing MOOX.

  22. Rodney Dawes said,

    February 27, 2008 at 12:53 pm

    Gravatar

    I’m not concerned about what Rodney says about me. I am entirely comfortable with my position in GNOME, and the respect that I have earned among a very broad majority of members of the project. Those who work in public roles get a lot of crap from time to time, and I’m used to it.

    Yes. I’m quite used to get plenty crap as well, especially from you.

    I wouldn’t exactly say that you’ve earned respect, though, so much as created a facade of it.
    You came in with the premise of being the face of GNOME, rather than working up to it. You came in and took advantage of the fact that we didn’t have marketing or publicity, setting yourself up to be in the position you wanted to be in. Ever since you “joined” this community, you have done nothing for me, but provide mockery and insult. Your attitude and behavior leave much to be desired in the way of professionalism. Being in your position is nothing more to you than a tick on your resume.

    Please stop speaking about me in blog comments. It is rather unbecoming of your position.

    As far as I’m concerned, you and Roy are both on the same level.

  23. CHrisophorus said,

    February 27, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    Gravatar

    I’ve never see more fearmongering, mudslinging and FUD than on this very website.

    It’s a shame that it is the website of a so-called ‘free-software-evangelist’. If asked whether I would rather be forced to spend an hour with Steve Ballmer of with Roy Schestowitz I’d have think about it for a very long time.

  24. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 27, 2008 at 1:16 pm

    Gravatar

    It is rather insane that you strive to compare one who fights the abuses against Free software to one which makes those abuses. You know, just saying how Microsoft’s FUD gets generated (and why) does not make it FUD. It’s supposed to help people avoid and defeat those maneuvers.

  25. CHrisophorus said,

    February 27, 2008 at 1:29 pm

    Gravatar

    Aims never justified the means.

    Your methods are just as ugly as Steve Ballmer’s.

  26. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 27, 2008 at 2:04 pm

    Gravatar

    How did you end up comparing me to a madman like this… only Gawd knows…

    This argument is hopeless.

  27. Rodney Dawes said,

    February 27, 2008 at 3:10 pm

    Gravatar

    You know, just saying how Microsoft’s FUD gets generated (and why) does not make it FUD.

    It is FUD when you have no idea what the hell you’re talking about. You don’t work at either Microsoft or Novell (or do you?). You aren’t a lawyer. You don’t choose the direction of either company. As far as I can tell, all you do is sit on your ass and post crap to forums and web sites all day long. You don’t know what is and isn’t FUD with regards to Mono, Microsoft, Novell, or anything else. That’s the entire point of FUD. All you’re doing is buying into it, because you are full of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. If you weren’t, you wouldn’t have this web site up to post your trash on. You would be confident and knowing of what was happening, and that things would end in a good way. Instead, here you are, revelling in the FUD.

  28. CHrisophorus said,

    February 27, 2008 at 4:32 pm

    Gravatar

    Hear, hear! Well-said.

  29. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 27, 2008 at 9:40 pm

    Gravatar

    Rodney,

    Prior to joining this site (a couple of weeks after the Novell deal) I realised that I was looking at the wrong problems by advocating GNU/Linux for years. When someone walks around offering bounties on Linux’s head and bribing diplomats, then clearly it’s important to put a stop to it. Things are more complex they you wish for them to be. Microsoft will never let Linux just win based on technical merits. It plays hardball. It cheats. Just look back at the OS/2 days. Microsoft continues to use the same tactics (if not much worse) and it’s worth attention so that it can be combated effectively.

    Lastly, to use an analogy. If you always just praise a young person for everything, he or she might never improve. It’s by pointing out problems that things will improve. Just because I’m pointing out the problems doesn’t mean I make them. At least I don’t find endless problems in actual GNU/Linux distributions and publicizing them like Beranger does. I think /that’s/ damaging because it can be used against us.

  30. CHrisophorus said,

    February 28, 2008 at 7:44 am

    Gravatar

    Roy, let me assure you that Linux is well capable of making her own decisions, she doesn’t need the tutelage of a strange young man. …please, get a girlfriend, a boyfriend or whatever.

    All your website does is undermining Linux users’ reputation. Not all of us are wearing tinfoil hats.

  31. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 28, 2008 at 8:42 am

    Gravatar

    You know, just pointing things out does not make the observer malicious. I post here information that others are shy to post or haven’t access to. If you think something here harms Linux users’ reputation, please provide examples.

    Pursuit for truth and liability for crimes/corruption shouldn’t harm anyone’s reputation, apart from those who carry guilt. A person who ‘dares’ to report abuse, misuse or misconduct is bound to become a victim of personal attacks and smear campaigns, but whose word you trust is a separate matter altogether.

  32. CoolGuy said,

    February 28, 2008 at 11:03 am

    Gravatar

    I know Roy is right on this…

    I have seen a lot of smooth talking assholes who end up back stabbing you one day for their own personal gains.

    Talking nice things and acting in a way that totally undermines ones reputation. I rather be with a person who will tell the right thing and act in the right way even if it sounds bad.

    My 2 cents.

    Icaza and Jeff are going down the wrong road. They way they are acting is damaging gnome and foss in the long run.

  33. Michael Moore said,

    February 28, 2008 at 3:31 pm

    Gravatar

    I think some of your writing is on track, other articles tend to lean towards the stuff I do. Which is total propaganda! Watch out what your report and that it does not lean to heavily

  34. Edgar F. Hilton said,

    March 7, 2008 at 10:02 am

    Gravatar

    I did a simple query in Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon 7.10:

    >>> apt-get remove –purge `dpkg -l | grep mono | awk ‘{print $2}’`

    The list of items that was removed was impressive:

    f-spot* gnome-rdp* libart2.0-cil* libgconf2.0-cil* libglade2.0-cil* libglib2.0-cil* libgmime2.2-cil* libgnome-vfs2.0-cil* libgnome2.0-cil* libgtk2.0-cil* libgtkhtml2.0-cil* libmono-cairo1.0-cil* libmono-corlib1.0-cil* libmono-corlib2.0-cil* libmono-data-tds1.0-cil*
    libmono-data-tds2.0-cil* libmono-security1.0-cil* libmono-security2.0-cil* libmono-sharpzip0.84-cil* libmono-sharpzip2.84-cil* libmono-sqlite1.0-cil* libmono-sqlite2.0-cil* libmono-system-data1.0-cil* libmono-system-data2.0-cil* libmono-system-web1.0-cil*
    libmono-system-web2.0-cil* libmono-system1.0-cil* libmono-system2.0-cil* libmono0* libmono1.0-cil* libmono2.0-cil* libndesk-dbus-glib1.0-cil* libndesk-dbus1.0-cil* librsvg2.0-cil* libvte2.0-cil* mono-common* mono-gac* mono-jit* mono-runtime* tomboy

    Out of all these, I’ve noticed that Ubuntu has made a big deal about f-spot and tomboy. I personally am not happy about that, as I think this is a dangerous path to follow. However, I am not detecting much dependency of GNOME on mono as of this time as far as this popular distribution is concerned. I have been running without mono for some time now and everything else in GNOME still seems to work.

    In my mind, Ubuntu — and any others that follow this trend toward using Mono or C# for that matter — should be the ones that we as the Linux community should monitor closely. Linux has been able to make great decisions in the past, and I think that she’ll continue to do so in the future.

    Whistleblowers are never popular, however I thank you, and applaud you, Roy, for bringing this to our attention. I’ll personally be in the lookout for this in the future. However, at this time, I do fail to see the connection between GNOME and Mono other than by association (which is itself somewhat too close for comfort), not by technical dependency.

    My 2 cents as well.

  35. Béranger said,

    March 7, 2008 at 10:22 am

    Gravatar

    > However, at this time, I do fail to see the connection between GNOME and Mono other than by association … not by technical dependency.

    1. Shipping with at least a Mono application BY DEFAULT (i.e. Tomboy) is more than “association”, it’s SUPPORTING.

    2. RECOMMENDING Tomboy (a Mono app) in the OFFICIAL presentation of a GNOME release is more than “association”, see:
    http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/2.16/index.html.en#rnfeatures-tomboy
    http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/2.18/index.html.en#detail
    http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/2.20/index.html.en#rnusers-tomboy

    Still, you don’t *technically* depend on Mono. YET.

  36. Roy Schestowitz said,

    March 7, 2008 at 10:58 am

    Gravatar

    Béranger, what do you know about Moonlight and OOXML translators? Other than associated fees (for patents) Microsoft started raving about yesterday, bear in mind that they wrote all those dependable pieces in C#. I doubt it’s a coincidence.

  37. Miles said,

    May 28, 2008 at 11:21 am

    Gravatar

    Yes, indeed. I’ve just checked the links in here and it’s pretty safe to say that a few weeks/months ago, Miguel or somebody else from GNOME told the editors to change the headline (maybe the body as well) of this article.

    If you follow the google search link below, it is plainly obvious that Roy has lied. The article’s title was not changed at all.

    Google search link

    Note especially the mailing-list archive with a message just days after the original publishing referring to the article with the current headline.

    Looks like Roy’s been caught with his hand in the liar jar.

  38. Roy Schestowitz said,

    May 28, 2008 at 5:55 pm

    Gravatar

    Miles,

    I’ve just looked back at what gave me the impression that Linux Planet used to say that GNOME would be based on .NET. It was this:

    http://boycottnovell.com/2007/07/23/gnome-mono-dep/ (see the two URLs in the quote)

    I now realise that I must have mixed the two adjacent URLs (Register and Linux Planet), so you’re right. I got caught up in the impression that the latter had changed. It wasn’t, and I apologise. I tried to check this to verify before, but wasn’t successful. There was an argument about the article from The Register later (especially the headline) and I was convinced it’s based on Linux Planet (where I publish sometimes). You were right and I was wrong.

  39. Miles said,

    May 29, 2008 at 11:35 am

    Gravatar

    Think maybe you could stop jumping to conclusions and accusing people of wrongdoing when no such wrongdoing was done, perhaps?

    You consistently make these “mistakes”, but you haven’t yet changed your ways and continue to make them (which makes me and a lot of other people believe you do it on purpose).

  40. Jiivandeva said,

    May 30, 2008 at 5:21 am

    Gravatar

    The Real Question is Mono a MS inspired Trojan Horse designed to destroy
    Linux as a whole. If it is so then let the inquisitions begin. We can start by Forking Gnome and removing the FUC – Faulty Useless Code from Gnome as a whole.

What Else is New


  1. SIPO (China's Patent Office) Taken Over by Patent Maximalists

    A look at China's race to the bottom (decline in quality) when it comes to patents, assuming quite wrongly that quantity is more important than quality and severe penalties for perceived infringement will spur innovation



  2. The Alice Case Continues to Smash Software Patents (This Time OpenTV's); Will the EPO Ever Pay Attention?

    The potency or the grip of software patents in the United States is quickly eroding, but the EPO continues to act as though software patents are legitimate



  3. EPO Staff Responds to Team Battistelli's Expansion to Include French Economic Propagandist on the Payroll

    With strings attached (like string puppets of Battistelli in various units including the Investigative Unit), can the new Chief Economist, who is French and paid by Battistelli, ever be trusted?



  4. UPC: To Understand Who Would Benefit From It Just Look at Who's Promoting It (Like TPP)

    The UPC, which is designed to aid patent trolls and aggressors (and their lawyers), is still being advanced by the EPO and some misinformed (but loyal to these former groups) politicians



  5. Trolls Molestos: Rovi (del famoso Angry Birds) Ayuda al Más Largo Troll de Patentes de Microsoft Intellectual Ventures (Corregido)

    Alguna vez conocido como hacedor de juegos y más tarde como vigilancia en masa en jugadores, Rovi ahora se ESTA ALIANDO CON EL MÁS GRANDE TROLL DE PATENTES



  6. Estadísticas de Invalidación de Patentes y Costos de Litigación de Patentes (incluso si son falsas) Muestran que la Esfera de Patentes y los Estándares de Examinación son un Probleman, No Sólo en Los Estados Unidos

    Demasiadas falsas patentes que no deberían haber sido otorgadas en primer lugar y fraudulentes jucios de patentes que terminan en favor del acusado sirve para mostrar el costo externo (o externalidad) cuando set trata de un bajisímo sistema de patentes que se esfuerza en otorgar muchas patentes irrespectivamente de su mérito.



  7. The 'Offenses' of EPO Staff Representatives Boil Down to Truth-Telling

    Dutch television examined the documents of the mock 'trials' against SUEPO leaders and concluded that whistle-blowing (i.e. exposing abuses by EPO management), not misconduct, is the reason for overzealous dismissals



  8. Rumours About Dismissal of Benoît Battistelli and New Letter From Union Syndicale Federale Blasting Battistelli's Behaviour

    hings have been heating up since the dismissal of staff representatives at the European Patent Office (EPO) and some even spread rumours about withdrawal/dismissal of the EPO's President



  9. VirnetX Case Against Apple Shows Not the Problem With Patent Trolls But With Software Patents

    What the media really ought to be talking about after the high-profile VirnetX case, rather than obsess about the status of Apple or patent trolls in the Eastern District of Texas



  10. Diápositivas de Nueva Charla Explican la Connección Entre la Corte De Patentes Unitarias (UPC) y Patentes de Software

    Benjamín Henrion habló el pasado Domingo acerca de las patentes de software europeas -una presentación que habla de la Corte Unitaria de Patentes, por la que la OEP aboga sin cesar y que es lo que significa para las patentes de software.



  11. Las Políticas de Microsoft Alienan Incluso a los Hinchas Más Acérrimos de Microsoft, Incluyendo Pro-Microsoft Web Sites

    El agresivo comportamiento de Microsoft y su BAJA CALIDAD DE PRODUCTOS dejan algunos de sus últimos restos de ´hinchas´ descorazonados y molestos.



  12. Links 6/2/2016: CoreOS Rocket 1.0, Scientific Linux 7.2

    Links for the day



  13. Maybe It's Time for Class Action Lawsuits Against Microsoft for Forced Vista 10 'Upgrades', Which Were Definitely No Accident

    The sheer arrogance of Microsoft, which silently changes the operating system on people's computers (without their consent), makes lawsuits imperative, not just a possibility



  14. Readers' Article: A Strange Conspiracy of Silence in the German Media (Part II)

    Željko Topić's allegedly dark background, which includes a suicide, a retreat of potential witnesses, German funds in Topić's private bank account and several more interesting bits



  15. Links 5/2/2016: Wine 1.9.3, Slackware 14.2 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  16. Links 4/2/2016: Red Hat Upgraded, Ubuntu Tablet

    Links for the day



  17. The Siege Continues: Patent Lawyers Want More Patents, Including Software Patents, In Spite of Alice

    Lawyers who make money from patent disputes make rather apparent their aspirations, which include patent saturation even in domains that are patents-exempt



  18. European Patent Office Pretends It's Business as Usual and Prepares New Vanity Pieces

    The PR strategy of the EPO, whose destructive patent strategy continues unabated (for now), latches onto Colombia and strives to manufacture mythology wherein the public, patent examiners and patent applicants are all very happy with the EPO



  19. The 'International' Trade Commission Imposes/Reinforces Software Patents to Establish Another Embargo

    The International [sic] Trade Commission is meddling in competition and allowing a US giant, Cisco in this case, to potentially block rivals (no imports from abroad) using software patents



  20. Readers' Article: A Strange Conspiracy of Silence in the German Media (Part I)

    The views of some of our readers regarding reluctance in the German media to challenge the EPO's violations of German law, probably because Germany benefits from being a host nation of the EPO



  21. Benoît Battistelli's EPO: From Show Trials and Mock Trials to a Self-Aggrandising Propaganda Event Later Today in Rijswijk

    A headsup from a reader regarding today's highly misleading event in Rijswijk (e.g. to mislead the media or seed positive media coverage in the Netherlands) and how it was set up



  22. Caricature of the Day: EPO President

    New caricature about Benoît Battistelli, his bodyguards, and the assault on free speech at the European Patent Office



  23. Company Known as European Patent Office Provides Tips on How to Patent Software in Europe

    The European Patent Office (EPO) uses its attendance at CeBIT, which is a corporate expo, to promote software patents in spite of the European Patent Convention (EPC)



  24. Links 3/2/2016: Dell GNU/Linux Laptop, Wine 1.8.1

    Links for the day



  25. The Most Detailed Explanation (Yet) of What's Wrong With the EPO

    The EPO's insistence that it remains above the law is not only coming under fire by the media but is also being challenged based on people who are familiar with the applicability of law to international organisations



  26. Angry Trolls: Rovi (of Angry Birds Fame) Helps Microsoft's Largest Anti-Linux Patent Troll, Intellectual Ventures (Corrected)

    nce known as a game maker and later made notorious for mass surveillance on gamers, Rovi now liaises with the world's largest patent troll



  27. Patent Invalidation Statistics and Cost of Patent Litigation (Even If Bogus) Show That Patent Scope and Examination Standards a Problem in Europe, Not Just the US

    Far too many bogus patents (patents that should not be granted in the first place) and spurious patent lawsuits that end up in favour of the defendant serve to show the external cost (or externality) when it comes to low-quality patent systems that strive to grant a lot of patents irrespective of merit



  28. Es Oficial: Por Medio de Entrismo, Microsoft Ha Convertido a la Pro-Linux Nokia en un Parásito de Patentes Anti-Linux

    Microsoft ha convertido a Nokia en un troll de patentes que ahora ataca a Linux y Android.



  29. Richard Stallman: Patentes Europeas de Software Regresan con la Corte Unitaria de Patentes (UPC)

    Debates acerca de la UPC estan siendo peleados por profesionales de software (entidades prácticantes) y elementos PARÁSITICOS como los abogados de patentes.



  30. SUEPO (EPO Staff Union) Appears to Have Launched a New and Improved Web Site After Attempts to Crush ('Decapitate') SUEPO

    SUEPO, the largest staff union of the European Patent Office, shows signs of strength rather than signs of weakness amidst attacks on the staff and a lot of media coverage, political interventions, and much more


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts