I also think that they be allowed to talk about .Net, but on the basis of mono .Net which is a completely free (GPLed) .Net platform originally developed by Ximian (now owned by Novell).
http://www.mono-project.com/about/index.html
<quote> Mono is a comprehensive open source development platform based on the .NET framework that allows developers to build Linux and cross-platform applications with unprecedented productivity. Mono's .NET implementation is based on the ECMA standards for C# and the Common Language Infrastructure.
Sponsored by Novell and led by Miguel de Icaza, the Mono project has an active and enthusiastic contributing community. Mono includes both developer tools and the infrastructure needed to run .NET client and server applications.
</quote>
Regards Praveen A
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:58:27 +0530, Sandip Bhattacharya
sandip@lug-delhi.org wrote:
Ramanraj K wrote:
My two cents. If someone from MS is going to talk about an MS only product or MS only tools that are not OSS (and have no direct relevance to the lug), however technical it might be, I think the answer should be NO. Same goes for a Mac. IMHO, that is completely off-topic for a LUG. LUGs are not only-tech-groups. There are certain philosophies and common sense rules that we do follow.
We have had quite loud discussions in this matter at ILUG-Delhi. The general consensus is that private sponsorship is acceptable, there will be no opportunity for any vendor to talk about proprietary products.
Talking about .Net is a bit into the gray area though, because it has some relevance to the Mono community. However, a condition can be put, that the only implementations that can be demonstrated, would be using FOSS toolkits, and not using Visual Studio IDE or the MS command line .Net compiler. I personally believe this is a reasonable condition, which wont let other people complain that we are "prejudiced to the company".
- Sandip
-- "সনà§à¦¦à§€à¦ª"
Sandip Bhattacharya * Puroga Technologies * sandip@puroga.com Work: http://www.puroga.com * Home: http://www.sandipb.net
PGP/GPG Signature: 51A4 6C57 4BC6 8C82 6A65 AE78 B1A1 2280 A129 0FF3
Fsf-friends mailing list Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends
On Thursday 28 October 2004 09:57, Praveen A wrote:
I also think that they be allowed to talk about .Net, but on the basis of mono .Net which is a completely free (GPLed) .Net platform originally developed by Ximian (now owned by Novell).
On the other hand, we've Portable .Net, which is a GNU project. They are making impressive progress with very little resources and less than a handful of developers (including our very own Gopal V.)
http://www.gnu.org/projects/dotgnu/
Mono receives immense PR and attention possibly because of Miguel and Nat's charisma and the Novell factor. But people in the FSF-I list should be at least aware of the existence of DotGNU project.
Sajith.
Sajith T S said on Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 10:30:38AM +0530,:
Nat's charisma and the Novell factor. But people in the FSF-I list should be at least aware of the existence of DotGNU project.
And also the fact that Miguel forked off from the GNU project for his steadfast refusal to adhere to the ideals of the GNU project.
Mahesh T. Pai wrote:
Sajith T S said on Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 10:30:38AM +0530,:
Nat's charisma and the Novell factor. But people in the FSF-I list should be at least aware of the existence of DotGNU project.
And also the fact that Miguel forked off from the GNU project for his steadfast refusal to adhere to the ideals of the GNU project.
I didnt get this. Mono is under GPL, I believe. What other ideals caused a problem?
- Sandip
Praveen A pravi.a@gmail.com writes:
I also think that they be allowed to talk about .Net, but on the basis of mono .Net which is a completely free (GPLed) .Net platform originally developed by Ximian (now owned by Novell).
Thought mono is a GPLed software, the motivations of that project are not very supportive. DotNET is a dirty commercial venture. Mono's intention is not to defeat the dirty plan., but rather to enhance it on a different platform. If any GLUG/LUG decide to let a session on DotNET, it should be purely on DotGNU.
The difference in the motivation can be seen from this page.,
http://www.dotgnu.org/danger.html
Cheers, Joe
Joe Steeve wrote:
Thought mono is a GPLed software, the motivations of that project are not very supportive. DotNET is a dirty commercial venture. Mono's intention is not to defeat the dirty plan., but rather to enhance it on a different platform. If any GLUG/LUG decide to let a session on DotNET, it should be purely on DotGNU.
And how do you think .Net is different from Java in this regard?
- Both are backed by software giants - Both companies have traditionally been fiercely proprietary - Both of them offer a new language/platform. - While C# is now an ECMA standard, Java is still architected by Sun's engineers (even though Sun can claim that they have a "community" process for extending the language/specs) - Both have patents of various aspects of the implementation. - Both have proprietary implementations in the market. - Both have evangelists eager to win converts to the new platform. - Both the corporations are profit driven.
Yet, since the days Java came into the market, there has been an explosion in FOSS software. We have several Java implementations now(including various GNU ones), and none to my knowledge was started off to defeat someone, but rather to provide an alternative.
Then why jump upon .Net just because it is offered from a particular company? Let them be misled into thinking they can infect the FOSS movement, while let us keep doing the reverse. ;)
BTW, the heydays of software products is over. Prepare yourself for the next generation - services[1]. In the future, it wont matter to consumers which OS/language/platform they use - the service will be God. In that point of view, Mono(and especially Mono ASP.Net)/dotGNU is going to be critical. So call them enhancing a dirty venture, if you will. But just like Apache has taken over the backend web server market, you will find Linux/Mono/dotGNU taking over the currently booming market of ASP.Net applications.
As somebody had once said something similar - "The dirty plan being defeated will be entirely a side effect". :)
- Sandip
[1] http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/opensource/paradigmshift_0504.ht...
Sandip Bhattacharya sandip@lug-delhi.org writes:
Yet, since the days Java came into the market, there has been an explosion in FOSS software. We have several Java implementations now(including various GNU ones), and none to my knowledge was started off to defeat someone, but rather to provide an alternative.
This is completely right. But the reasons why Java and DotNET were established are totally different.
http://www.dotgnu.org/danger.html
explains that. But for this reason., I dont think DotNET would have raised so much controversy.
Then why jump upon .Net just because it is offered from a particular company?
Na., not really. Just the reasons and motivation with which a technology is being offered.
Let them be misled into thinking they can infect the FOSS movement, while let us keep doing the reverse. ;)
Hmm.., hopefully. But the problem is newbies (especially students) dont actually realize this. They are attracted in large numbers into this mess. As I had explained, M$ sponsored user groups are places where "Intellectual property rights" is being equated with FOSS values. And students/newbies who do are not aware of the issues involved believe this and fall prey to these designs.
Cheers, Joe
PS: Something in the OPs signature was making a part of the Emacs display get screwed up. I'm not sure why. What is it?
Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/opensource/paradigmshift_0504.ht...
Sandip, thanks for the link to Tim O'Reilly's article at: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/opensource/paradigmshift_0504.ht...
The Internet is indeed the new "operating system", and it could bring in more meaning to the life we live. Free Software philosophy is at the heart of these developments, and here is another relevant post I caught from the india-egov list:
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [India-egov] Net-savvy activists are more vigilant Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 03:58:28 +0000 From: Sameer Sachdeva sachdeva_sameer@yahoo.co.in Reply-To: India-egov@yahoogroups.com To: India-egov@yahoogroups.com
Net-savvy activists are more vigilant
ANI[ SATURDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2004 03:22:31 PM ]
WASHINGTON: Civic activists who have access to the Internet are more vigilant and can serve the society better, according to a study co- authored by Dr Debbie Denise Reese, an educational researcher at the NASA-sponsored Classroom of the Future in the Center for Educational Technologies at Wheeling Jesuit University, and researchers at Virginia Tech and Penn State.
The finding is important because it shows that people use the Internet to make a difference in their communities. Reese notes that the consequence for education is that people can use the Internet to have a positive effect on their school systems.
The researchers tried to collect data to draw conclusions about how people's level of education and levels of their being extroverts affected their activism towards community service.
People who were more informed and educated were more active in their community and used the Internet to conduct civic business. The more extroverted and educated people also believed that they could have an effect on how things operate in their community.
-
Joe Steeve -
Mahesh T. Pai -
Praveen A -
Ramanraj K -
Sajith T S -
Sandip Bhattacharya