Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GNU is Not Unix

DotGNU Meet-a-thon 157

Posted by michael from the good-gnus dept.
Gopal.V writes "It's time for the Quarterly DotGNU IRC Meet-a-thon. As usual, we'll be having it on #dotgnu on irc.openprojects.net. We will be discussing the current state of DotGNU, where we've gone and where we should be headed. Anyone who is interested should join us. In particular, we are not only looking for developers to be involved in this meet, but also potential DotGNU users. We are very interested in addressing any questions/input from anyone who will one day use our framework. So come one, come all. The last meet was a lot of fun and we expect this this IRC meet will be even better than the last. Again, the IRC meet is taking place on: Server: irc.openprojects.net, Channel: #dotgnu. The meeting will run for a 36 hour period from 22:00 UTC Saturday 29 July 2002 until 10:00 UTC Monday 31 July. Every 4 hours will be an official meet time, when the major DotGNU members will be online. Most discussions will revolve round DotGNU projects and other issues concerning freedom in the new MS initiatives like .NET , and Palladium." I think this announcement may be slightly wrong on the times since it disagrees with the post to the email list; but this is posted as submitted.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DotGNU Meet-a-thon More

DotGNU Meet-a-thon

Comments Filter:

  • Umm (Score:2, Funny)

    by RTFA Man ( 578488 )
    shouldn't that be GNU/dot?
  • New MS initiatives like .NET? Since when is .NET new? Last I heard, dotGNU had been created as a Free Software alternative to .NET.

  • For those wondering what dotgnu is... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by User 956 ( 568564 ) on Saturday June 29, 2002 @03:24PM (#3792969) Homepage
    IIRC, I read that DotGNU [dotgnu.org] will enable you to run your C# programs on the free GNU/Linux operating system using exclusively free software. With DotGNU [dotgnu.org], you will be able to use C# if you wish, without surrendering your freedom to study, share, change, and generally control all the software that you use.

    This is, of course a boon, however it is worthless without some soft of workaround for Microsoft's Palladium scheme [theregister.co.uk]:

    Microsoft's "Palladium certification scheme will rip the guts out of the GPL. That is, the minute I begin tinkering with my software, my ability to interface with the Great PKI in the Sky will be broken. I'll have a Linux box with a GPL, all right; but if I exercise the license in any meaningful way I'll render my system 'unauthorized for Palladium' and lose business. So instead, I imagine I'll be turning to my vendor for support, updates, modifications and patches. And I'll be dependent on them for support services at whatever price they can wheedle out of me because I dare not lose my Palladium authorization. I wonder if the cost of ownership of an open-source system will actually be lower than the cost of a proprietary system under such circumstances."

    • Enough with the Palladium scheme already!
      Every OSS news is not about the Palladium scheme! Let us discuss the dotGNU meet-a-thon in stead of Palladium for a second, please!

    • Why do people keep modding up this troll?
      Ripped off from [gnu.org]

      Stallman added: "Mono will enable you to run your C# programs on the free GNU/Linux operating system using exclusively free software. With Mono, you will be able to use C# if you wish, without surrendering your freedom to study, share, change, and generally control all the software that you use."
      • If you would, please note the proper citation, and the link to DotGNU.ORG.

        Mods, please mod this idiot down as a troll, as he's just wasting others' karma. Thanks.
      • it's not ripped off. He just excercised the rights afforded to him by the GPL. he even included a link to the "source". remember, information wants to be free!

      • Stallman added: "Mono will enable you to run your C# programs on the free GNU/Linux operating system using exclusively free software. With Mono, you will be able to use C# if you wish, without surrendering your freedom to study, share, change, and generally control all the software that you use."

        No punt intended. But how can you "control" someting you put under GPL?
        You gave up all control. The only thing you still can consider to have is some kind of "meta control". If you liek to control your software or your IP GPL is surely only under raw circumstances the right thing.

        If your point was that MS is likely controlling you, if you have no alternative, like dotGNU, then you are right.

        But why switching tp C# for no reason? There are plenty of not controlled alternatives.

        angel'o'sphere
        • No punt intended. But how can you "control" someting you put under GPL? You gave up all control. The only thing you still can consider to have is some kind of "meta control". If you liek to control your software or your IP GPL is surely only under raw circumstances the right thing.

          I [gnu.org] think the general [gnu.org] gist [gnu.org] of Stallman's [gnu.org] comment [gnu.org] isn't that you control the code, but that you're fully in charge of compiled code (software) on your own machine(s), versus the level of control one would supposedly have under a Microsoft-based software solution.

          (BTW, did I include enough citations? I don't want to be accused of ripping anyone off)
    • I think that MS cannot - and does not - have the resources alone to manage sort of PK infrastructure required of this system to work. I don't think they realise the *network* issues involved in managing the PK authentication of x million users trying to authenticate against every damn piece of documentation/application that you will/might use. A billion documents? A million applications? Given either the latency of the net or the sluggishness/crapness of MS servers/system and the fact that they will try and do this over HTTP, the whole system will die. Juarez - the system originator - says that it will take a 100 million machines sold before the system takes hold. I think the system will be unsatisfactory before it gets to that limit. I've used passport and it's crap; I expect nothing less of the new authentication system. Joe Public will get pissed if they can't listen to Emninen's latest song without a microseconds' blink and I think the system that M$ will use to support palladium *will* tank. History is with me here; MS has never run a satisfactory public service. Period.

      I think the only way to do this properly is to design and run a PK infrastructure with the help of a public body such as the W3C or IETF, who should be involved in designing and maintaining a PK support infrastructure. Much like the X500 directory system but directed solely at PK management. We should be there to *help* M$ in their quest to help their customers. Of course, we should do this to help ourselves.

      Therefore, quid pro quo, if the management system is owned/managed/run by the public domain, the Palladium system should be commoditized i.e have an open API, and any apps that the system wil run, should be signed against *any* publicly trusted body. Maybe even the GNU project - or even Slash - can become such a body.

      Remember, Paladium is at the "bluesky" stage: we should get in there and get what *we* the unwashed want. Is the EFF involved? Juarez says they're open to *everyone*. We should at least take advantage of that rather than endless threads whinging about it.

      Essentially, we should design something which embraces and extends Palladium. A neat reversal, no?
    • The Palladium scheme can never work. This is another classic case of FUD from microsoft. The reason this will never work is that as soon as someone makes a chip that won't work with Linux or any other non-MS Operating System, everyone who buys this chip as a Linux box will have to return it to the store for something that "works" with Linux. Maybe then we'll switch to the PowerPC chip instead. Who knows. Motorola will make a killing in the chip market, and Intel and AMD will have to rethink their chip design.
  • I totally respect anyone's decisions on what to target new development on - it is your business.

    It is a shame that COBOL has Fujitsu to develop COBOL.NET but that Ada has no such large corporate to perform this sort of work. Without such a sponsor it is hard to see how Ada gets out of the catch22 of: User: "Why use Ada when it doesn't support feature X?" Vendor: "Why support feature X when there is no user demand?"

    Perhaps there is some hope in the 'DotGNU' project. The item that interested me in the FAQ for this is:

    "1.17 Will C and C++ be supported in DotGNU?

    Code which is written in C or C++ can be used with DotGNU, *if* it is distributed with DotGNU or otherwise installed like you normally install software. However you cannot use C or C++ to implement webservice programs that are meant to run in the Secure Execution Environment (SEE), like it will be possible with e.g. Java, Ada, C# and Perl - at least not until someone solves the difficult issues of compiling C to some kind of portable intermediate representation in such a way that the Secure Execution Environment can efficiently verify that the program is not trying to do something malicious."
    Would you like to see Ada support in DotGNU?
    • Well, this is a surprising post. The thing about Ada is that the main point of it is the compilers and environments that are available for it (usually a lot of $ too). I really don't think people would care about running Ada on a .NET type platform.

      At my job, we are switching away from Ada to Java. Enough said.
      • I dont agree with you there. Ada is strongly ingrained in the gov infrastructure. There are a large amount of work done by the gov that is still being done with Ada, and not only gov, but most of the larger scientific corporations. I don't feel Java would replace them anytime soon.

        A lot of people care about Ada, a lot more than Java ( I believe, from the amount of SN with respect to Java).
        • Yeah, but switching from existing Ada implementations to Ada on dotWhatever might as well be switching to a whole new language/platform.

          Microsoft had to change VB and JScript quite a bit to work with .NET. The same would need to happen with Ada, though to a lesser exent. Just that little bit of change would probably panic existing Ada developers (not to mention using the whole new package system).

          As Microsoft says, C# is the best language to use for .NET. I don't think Ada would provide any advantages.

          Don't get me wrong, it would be cool to see Ada for dotGNU, but I highly doubt many would care beyond just some academics :-/
  • Fighting .NET is stupid. .NET is a great technology, it's an ECMA standard.

    I understand the fear of Hailstorm/MyServices (which is now dead, MS gave up on it), Palladium, etc.

    It seems that the project leaders here are misinformed since they seem to think that .NET == MyServices == Palladium which is not the case.

    Support Mono, not dotGNU!
    • Why do you say mono is better than dotgnu?
      aren't they both trying to develop a c# compiler and a web service as well as the exact same framework libs as MS architecture on top of the open .net bytecode spec?
      just asking :)

    • Support Mono, not dotGNU!

      Why is that? does dotGNU have something that Mono is missing? if so, what?

      • Well DotGNU cannot be compared to Mono ... Compare DotGNU Portable.Net (which is the C# runtime/compiler/libs) to Mono ...

        DotGNU is much bigger !!

        • ehhmmm... my .NET knowledge is very limited, could you spell it out for me a little? what is there to .NET besides the runtime environment + compiler + libs?

          • The .NET is not a desktop system ... it is intensely network oriented ... stuff like Passport , Hailstorm , MyServices etc are also part of .NET What you see is .NET SDK , and not .NET "The Big Picture"

            .NET SDK has classes like PassportIdentity whic we cannot plug into the MS plumbing .. we have to make replacements
    • Fighting .NET is stupid. .NET is a great technology, it's an ECMA standard.

      Hardly. The only parts that have been submitted to the ECMA are C# [www.ecma.ch] and the CLI [www.ecma.ch]. Everything else, all the parts that provide the .NET functionality are another matter entirely.

      • well... like java all the libraries are going to flucturate wildly for at least a couple of versions... so there is really no point in submitting anything a language spec (that of C#) and the CLI to ECMA, is there?

        • Why not then work to improve Kawa or some other open source Java VM, instead of wasting your efforts on DotGnu?

          .Net is just like Java, without the libraries you really don't have anything much to work with. At least with Java GPL versions of the libraries have been done to some degree already, and at the end you get to use a lot of GPL'ed Java code as well. How much GPL'ed .NET code is around? App servers? P2P apps?

  • Fight, and Innovate (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    1. I think it's great that they are trying to prevent MS from taking over the web; they or others should also watch out for Palladium.

    2. The Free Software community will never really beat MS if it always tries to catch up with them. It should innovate on a large scale, visions for a free web etc, so that the industry and MS will be busy trying to catch up.
    • In what way preventing? By supporting and validating .NET as a viable language and platform, you are in fact helping Microsoft by pushing more people to use .NET and other related MS controlled standards (here's a thought - MS has way more control over the direction of .NET than Sun does over Java at this point).

      Instead of trying to catch up to Microsoft or become a tame Microsoft lap dog, why not instead support efforts like open Java VM's (Kawa) and libraries?

  • The times should have been "10:00 UTC Saturday 29th July until 22:00 UTC Sunday 30th July". Sorry for any confusion. Please join us on irc.openprojects.net#dotgnu, any time this weekend.

  • I'm disappointed with their choice of OPN (Score:4, Informative)

    by Clue4All ( 580842 ) on Saturday June 29, 2002 @04:28PM (#3793173) Homepage
    I'm especially disappointed with Rob Levin, but at the same time, I'm proud of OFTC.net which is turning out to be a worthy replacement for OpenProjects. Once again, people have demonstrated the Internet's abilitity to route around greed the same way it routes around damage.

    For those who aren't up to scratch with IRC history, Rob Levin is the founder of OpenProjects, a successful forum for Open Source developers. However, recently he was sacked from his workplace. Despite being offered employment in his area and worldwide, he has refused them on grounds of "being too good" and has instead taken the easy way out and pilfered the OpenProjects funds to maintain his $150,000 per annum income. Levin is now nothing more than an opportunist who is exploiting the goodwill of sponsors and the community, misrepresenting his own personal keep-me-rich charity as an Open Source fund, despite never having contributed a single line of code to any Open project. Recently, he's taken to abusing volunteers and developers on the IRC network, threatening to shut them down or "K-Line" (permanent ban) them from the network unless they conform with his views and contribute to his salary, in effect trying to milk them for money. He also knows exactly what people with resources to donate want to hear and is often able to sweet-talk money out of companies and individuals who want to assist the Open Source community.

    Note that I have nothing but respect for the other OpenProjects staff members, particularly their ircd coders. I hope that they will be successful in ejecting LILO from the team before he runs OpenProjects onto the rocks. After all, the network is every bit their property and the property of the bandwidth sponsorors as it is of this corrupt and misguided individual.

    In the meantime, I welcome you to #Mandrake and #kernelnewbies on irc.oftc.net!
    • You have every right to disagree with Rob Levin's behavior. Lots of people do [printf.net]. But how does this have anything to do with the decision to use OPN for what it is intended for?

      If you consider it a successful forum for Open Source developers, and you have nothing but respect for the other staffers, I don't understand why there is cause to discourage the use of OPN.
      • You're not disappointed with his dismissal of OPN. You're disappointed with my dismissal which I posted [kerneltrap.org] to kerneltrap a good 24 hours ago. Nevertheless, I'm willing to let it slip by as a well-moderated post is more likely to get the message through. Still, sad that people have to copy-and-paste articles word-for-word :-(

        I'm also disappointed to see people like you are still supporting Levin as I have seen him insult and hurt the feelings of innocent developers trying to use "OPN for what it is intended for" for no apparent reason. The abuse of power can't just be shrugged off; the issue must be addressed -- and the best way of doing so is by providing a community-driven alternative.

        -- Richard Osborne
        • Still, sad that people have to copy-and-paste articles word-for-word :-(

          Ah, well then my appoligies. It is a pretty sad state of affairs when one feels compelled to post on Slashdot so badly, yet can't think of anything intelligent to say, and proceeds to steal someone else's thoughts.

          I'm also disappointed to see people like you are still supporting Levin as I have seen him insult and hurt the feelings of innocent developers trying to use "OPN for what it is intended for" for no apparent reason. The abuse of power can't just be shrugged off; the issue must be addressed -- and the best way of doing so is by providing a community-driven alternative.

          Interesting that since I didn't outright slam Rob in my post, you assume that I support his actions.

          Regardless, I do not see how one can assert that OPN is not community driven, considering the thousands of people that regularly sign on. As a long time regular in a handful of channels, I feel fairly confident saying there is indeed a strong community there, and that I am a part of it.

          Frankly, I consider starting an alternate network over the behavior of one staffer to be a foolish waste of the resources that have been invested in OPN by countless individuals who are not Rob Levin. It seems to me a far more prudent solution would be to have him step down, rather than to encourage an exodous from a perfectly good network.

          But then, according to the Open Source naysayers, it's a standard Open Source tactic to fork a project rather than contribute to fixing it.


    • I'm sorry to see this sort of comment. It contains a number of untruths. I've recently been trolled a fair amount on OPN for asking for help to stay afloat while I finished setting up a nonprofit corporation to run OPN and to work on other community related projects. The economy has not been kind to me and to some others as well.

      Some people are annoyed that I've used global notices. Well, they're pretty annoying, so I can understand their viewpoint.

      Some people are irritated that I've asked for voluntary help, personally (not on behalf of OPN or the nonprofit) from the users. I'm sorry they feel that way, but am glad that some of the users have managed to do things like help me keep my apartment.

      Nobody is trying to eject me from OPN other than some trolls and some folks who are listening without asking a lot of questions about what they're hearing. All I'll say at this point is something I've said on OPN: rumor, innuendo and ridicule can destroy reputations and ruin good work. If someone tells you something about another person, ask them how they know it and who told them. Go to the original sources; if there are no original sources, think about why the person has none to provide. Think about what people tell you and look for inconsistencies. Anyone's reputation can be damaged by distortions and untruths.

      If you want to find out what I've been talking about lately, look here [sargasso.net] and here [sargasso.net]. If you're reading about this here, chances are you have not used OPN and I would appreciate your NOT using the PayPal button on that site. Any help I'm asking for, I'm asking from OPN users who know my work, who want to help and who have the means to do so without hurting themselves.

      Thanks,

      Rob Levin

      • Re:I'm disappointed with their choice of OPN (Score:5, Informative)

        by dzym ( 544085 ) on Saturday June 29, 2002 @08:39PM (#3793839) Homepage Journal
        Disregarding, once more, the sheer unethicalness of using your special privileges on the network to solicit money from your users. Disregarding, of course, the dubious legal grounds of your actions as related to Open Projects Network as a non-profit entity. How typical.

        And disregarding the fact that the group that you label the the trolls, the "vocal minority" as you call us, conveniently enough, just happen to include almost every single one of the former staff that have been with the network since the very beginning, and have been jumping ship precisely because they saw what was coming.

        Disregarding the fact that even various server sponsors have been silenced for complaining about your heavy-handed tactics in dealing with dissent.

        Disregarding the fact that the administrative channel, once a forum for the open transmission of thought and understanding, has been turned into a police state of staffers who silence users at a whim and k-line the "vocal minority" at the drop of a hat.

        Disregarding that the channel itself has been marked moderated (+m) purely because you do not have the guts to stand up to a fair critique of your mistakes.

        You, lilo, are out of control. Every last stabilizing factor in the OPN staff have been eliminated. All who remain are little more than cronies who will stand for everything you do or say because they know no better. Just this past weekend you removed the o:lines of 2 staff.opn members for the simple reason that they have been chatting on OFTC, the alternative to your iron-handed rule.

        Frankly, we're tired of your bullshit. Take it elsewhere.
      • I'm sorry to see this sort of comment. It contains a number of untruths.

        Some individual facts are off, I'll agree. And this was probably deliberately done. That said, IMO the crux of the matter is reflected truly.

        I've recently been trolled a fair amount on OPN ..... Nobody is trying to eject me from OPN other than some trolls and some folks who are listening without asking a lot of questions

        I really wish you'd stop labelling everybody that disagrees with you a troll. Many people that threw themselves wholeheartedly into OPN in the past fall into that category, based entirely upon their own experiences. Some server owners, and many opers (note that they aren't the same thing, on either OPN or OFTC) have jumped ship.

        You also keep stating that many would like to "eject" you from OPN. This isn't the entire picture. Many people would be happy for you to maintain responsibilities with OPN, but feel some aspects of your behaviour should change, and that OPN should be restructured so that less power resides with one single person.

        I feel that your constant misrepresentation of the the size and nature of the complaints reflects a lack of will and/or ability to address them properly.

  • Here's the dillema. I'm seeing this move from nice, open standards (C/C++) to languages that have strings attached, like Java and C$^H#. Even if C# is an ECMA standard, there is no getting around the fact that Microsoft is the one guiding its development and evolution. I don't know about the rest of you, but after what MS has done with Win32, I really don't trust them to come up with good API and language standards. And even if they do, I'd rather not have their hands on the riens. Why is there no truly open project (I'm talking ISO C/C++ open) trying to take on C# and Java instead of merely copying them?

    • I don't know about the rest of you, but after what MS has done with Win32, I really don't trust them to come up with good API and language standards.

      How about this: "I don't know about the rest of you, but after what MIT did with the Xt library, I really don't trust them to come up with a good API". And Xt is (arguably) one of the worst pieces of crap ever written.

      I could make the same statement about Motif, (pre-OSX) Apple, etc.

      Windowing toolkits are NOTORIOUS for turning into rats nests of APIs layered on APIs. Not to defend Win32, which is truly horrible, but it's not uncommon for things that require backward compatibility to grow more and more out of control until they have to be thrown away entirely.

      • Not just the fact that Win32 is ugly (though it is significantly more ugly than your other examples, which at least didn't change 1000 times in their evolution) but also what Microsoft pulled with IBM when they were trying to offer Win32 compatibility. Win32 is not just ugly, but a mess of hidden, constantly changing, poorly documented APIs. That's what I'm really worried about.
    • It will be a better language with a better runtime (Parrot). Well, okay, you can debate the better language part, but Parrot will be slick.
    • Sure and SUN has always been very clear?
      • I pointed out C# and Java in the same sentence. Sun doesn't have a history of pulling crap like Microsoft does (in fact, they've always been quite open about their technologies, particularly those in Solaris) but its still dangerous that they control a language as widely used as Java.
    • Because committee-driven standards usually take a *long* time to produce anything usefull and they often become convoluted with so many differing viewpoints incorporated.

      If you dont like C#, dont use it. Many people do like it, and many are using it.

      - Adam

      • It doesn't have to be a committe drivern standard initially. Neither C nor C++ were. As for the "if you don't like it don't use it" mentality I don't buy it. First, if I don't like it, I can bitch about it all I want. Second, even if I don't use it, people who don't have any foresight will, and we might be back at another Microsoft monopoly.
        • First, if I dont like your bitching, I'll bitch about it all I want.

          Second, please clarify how using C# is going to put us back at another microsoft monopoly?

          The language has some strong points and some weak points... regardless of your wild implication that people who use it "don't have any forsight", most people who do choose to use it are aware of the strong and weak points (GC, XML comments, atrributes, access to pointers, etc). All these things are widely discussed in a huge number of various .NET forums, mailing lists etc.

          This is just typical slashdot FUD. Bitching about C# ("we will end up in another monopoly!") is a complete waste of time if you have absolutely no reason (or at least dont care to state one) to dislike C# except simply because it came from Redmond.

          At the very least, give us your version of evil plots to take over the world with this new C# weapon....

  • Is CIL a standard? has joined #dotgnu g \_ \ _.--------.______\| | g o \ \______// _ ___ _ (_(__> \ | o a \ . C ___) ______ (_(____> | / a t /\ | C ____)/ \ (_____> |_/ t s / /\| C_____) | (___> / \ s e | ( _C_____)\______/ // _/ / \ e x | \ |__ \\_________// (__/ | x ö SignOff Masochist: #dotgnu (Remote closed the connection) @_@ I think MS's biggest strength is their development toolset. If Linux had an equivelent for DotGNU/Mono then we would be in a much stronger position. This appears to be Miguel de Icaza's perspective Yeah let's moderate the "meet" so nobody can ask any real questions.
    • Is CIL a standard?
      ö t3rmin4t0r [~gopal@61.1.229.139] has joined #dotgnu
      g \_ \ _.--------.______\| | g
      o \ \______// _ ___ _ (_(__> \ | o
      a \ . C ___) ______ (_(____> | / a
      t /\ | C ____)/ \ (_____> |_/ t
      s / /\| C_____) | (___> / \ s
      e | ( _C_____)\______/ // _/ / \ e
      x | \ |__ \\_________// (__/ | x
      ö SignOff Masochist: #dotgnu (Remote closed the connection)
      @_@
      I think MS's biggest strength is their development toolset. If Linux
      had an equivelent for DotGNU/Mono then we would be in a much
      stronger position. This appears to be Miguel de Icaza's perspective

      grrr stupid html
  • This story should be brought back up like a day or two before it begins
  • What's with DotGNU and C#? I thought C# was owned by Microsoft, but perhaps I'm wrong.
  • I'm a bit confused about the name. They are mentioning that they make a webservice broker that can handle C# code. Or more general CLR compliant code. And also Java.
    So in my understanding it's just a webservice broker. Where you have the freedom to use Java or CR compliant web service code.
    So why stress the dot/i?
  • I cannot figure out what's so great about .NET and .CLONES of .NET.

    Inter-process communication over the web? What is wrong with existing standards, such as HTTP Post and Get (et al)?

    Seems like nothing but a plot to compete with an over-complicated mess, known as Java, by making a new different over-complicated mess.
  • .NET technology is excellent! It is in many ways superior to java. Go mono!

    datrus

Slashdot Top Deals

The trouble with being punctual is that nobody's there to appreciate it. -- Franklin P. Jones

Close