Debian accepts Mono applications
ALL IS NOT WELL in Debian land as the venerable free software project has decided to accept Mono-based applications despite a warning issued by bearded GNU guru Richard Stallman.
Debian is just getting ready for the second update of its Linux version 5.0 which goes by the name of Lenny.
What spurred Stallman to speak up is the Mono-based note-taking application Tomboy. He thinks that by sticking the Tomboy package in its distribution, Debian runs a risk of getting sued by the Vole over its C# and .NET patents.
Mono is the open source implementation of Microsoft's .NET, which is written in its C# language. Mono was bought by Novell in 2003 and supports Linux, Solaris, other Unixes including the BSDs and Mac OS X. It has been used to develop a few Linux desktop programs such as the Evolution email client and Tomboy.
Stallman's concern is that if Debian were to be sued by the Vole that could threaten downstream desktop and embedded Linux distributions, including Xandros and Ubuntu along with all of their derivatives.
Fortunately everyone still has plenty of time to wave their arms and shout about this problem because the next version of Debian called Squeeze is reportedly still buggier than a tropical swamp.
According to Desktop Linux, the Tomboy knockers have been legion since an article was penned in OS News.
But if the Vole was going to bite you'd think its lawyers would have rattled off a few threatening missives after Tomboy was bunged into the GNOME v2.18 desktop two years ago.
Writing in his bog, Stallman argues that making Tomboy a default install package in Debian "leads the [free software] community in a risky direction." He said, "It is dangerous to depend on C#, so we need to discourage its use."
He thinks the problem is not with Tomboy or C# but rather with the danger that Microsoft might someday crack down on its claimed C# patents. If it does, that will "force all free C# implementations underground", he warns, where they will only be usable by wombles, we guess.
The Vole did quite well by pressuring TomTom to settle after suing it over FAT-related patents. Stallman thinks that suing free software developers over C#, and by extension .NET, might be the next logical move in Microsoft's anti-Linux litigation strategy. µ
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
Then Ubuntu is already screwed, as last two distributions included Evolution email client and Tomboy.
I think Stallman has a valid point; just because M$ hasn't swung hammer yet doesn't mean they won't in future. Especially if money flood slacks off even just a little.
Closer Linux gets to looking, smelling and acting like Windoze, the closer comes the day when M$ will strike.
Correct me if I am wrong, but MS submitted C Octothorpe as an ISO standard language.
If I am correct then how can MS sue anyone for implementing it?
While C# is an ISO standard language, I think the concern is more with possible patents on the bytecode/interpreted language compiler, runtime and implementing parts of the .NET library and framework.
Poor RMS, getting crazier and crazier as he gets older.
Microsoft links Mono project in several places across there website. They even once demoed .Net on Linux using Mono. They obviously want to encourage people to use C# on every platform. I do not see Microsoft dropping the hammer on Linux because of this issue.
Mono shouldn't be installed BY DEFAULT until microsoft discloses exactly what the license terms are for any patents they have on the specifications of the standard (everyone here forgot about RAMBUS?). While microsoft has to license their patents on "reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND)" terms, they have yet to state what those terms are, and they do NOT have to be free in any sense.
It's highly irresponsible for Debian and Ubuntu to include mono by default without seeing the license that microsoft claims is easy to get, but nobody has ever been allowed to see.
Show us the license!
RE: Microsoft seems to endorse Mono,
Maybe Microsoft wants to encourage it's use so that sometime in the future they can sue everyone. Remember Novell already has an agreement with Mocrosoft, that agreement doesn't extend to other verndos though.
Also ISO standard doesn't mean patent free.
Mohammad says: "I do not see Microsoft dropping the hammer on Linux because of this issue."
LOL! Boy are you naive! Have you not read the instances of the way Microsoft reacts to Linux in the past couple of years?
Open source licenses do NOT protect you from patents! EVERYONE knows this!
The point is that mono could be used as leverage over competitors without them realising it until its too late.
That's the thing about using Mono: Microsoft, Novell, and pro-Mono folks have NEVER made it clear or answered in plain english of the potential problems it can introduce. They all claim its safe, but NONE of them are lawyers!
That uncertainty (promises and muddy counter-arguments), has led some to be anti-Mono.
From now on, I'll install Ubuntu or Debian via command line. This installs a clean base that allows me to select what I want to install. Effectively, I'll be able to use either distro WITHOUT mono (and apps that need mono) from being installed by default.
Hasn't history, as exemplified by RAMBUS RDRAM, FAT, GIF, MP3 and the SCO farce taught us that by accepting these pseudo standards, whether rubberstamped by the (rather worthless) ISO, or not, whether "free" or not, we just make ourselves a future headache, as their useage, whilst perhaps attactive in the short term, is pissing in the genepool for future generations of freetards.
As regards predicting the outcome of a court case: Should you wish to examine the unbiasedness of judicial systems in a modern civilised country as regards intellectual property vs. freedom, look no further than the outcome of the Piratebay appeal, and the pedigree of the judge involved.
There is not a spoon long enough to sup with these devils.
They have to have their collective heads examined for risking the future of Linux over a couple of stupid programs that are not really needed in the main distro. Maybe they have already been paid off in some fashion? This makes no sense to me! Compare Ubuntu 9.04 with Win 7 and I would watch out for the "hammer" sooner than later. I do still love my XP though.
Sorry for second post,
Why aren't we all using online email readers. I checked out Tomboy - it's about as stable as Paris Hilton. I was going to say "MJ", but God has sorted that one out for us.
You've posted a link to ubuntu-devel list, to a message sent by Ubuntu's SJR and you wrote that Debian accepts Mono apps.
Debian's stance on this is clear - if it is Free/Libre software, it can go into the repos. It doesn't mean (like RMS assumed) that Debian is going to ship Tomboy in the default Gnome installation. (BTW, even if it does, you still have clean KDE and XFCE)
Default install of Debian was always minimal. You are free to install the problematic package later, but those are not installed by default.
Sorry for double comment, but before you jump into the /bashing/ wagon (meant for both journalists and visitors) you should read the stories from the source and not base your stances on hear-say.
RMS's comment:
http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono
Debian response:
http://blog.schmehl.info/Debian/tomboy-mono
I don't understand why this is big news. Tomboy has been in Main for forever now, and Tomboy was a _suggested_ package in the _gnome_ package for Lenny (5.0). It got moved from _suggested_ to _recommended_ for Squeeze, but not many people install the _gnome_ package anyway, since it includes a lot of stuff they don't want, like Gnash instead of Adobe Flash Player.
No one in Debian land really cares about this, or if they did, they had their arguments out two years ago. Why is it being reported all over the place?
I think perhaps the reason that this is flaring up only now, is because aptitude (and by extension, the GUI based frontends) selects "recommended" packages by default, but not "suggested" ones, therefore mono is now in the "default" installation. I think that's what this is all about..
Personally, I agree. .NET is a nasty cancer. Things seem to be written in .NET now and end up being even worse in terms of Linux usability than native Windows apps, as they won't run under Wine, and they hardly work under Mono either..
Now I understand what monkey boy Ballmer was on about when he was chanting Developers Developers Developers all that time ago.
While Stallman may have acted crazy at certain times in the past, I do believe he has a very valid point here. Microsoft doesn't need to do anything at the moment, all they have to do is wait until C# becomes entrenched deeply in the Linux codes. They can afford to wait for several years.
Anyone who doubts its possible should remember how RAMBUS working with other DRAM manufacturers to create a standard, infused some of its patented technology into the standard without notifying anyone, then after a while sued these companies for violating its patents.
Linux is taking the long route to general acceptance and market domination, when it finally does get there, it might be blown of the map with law suits