Wow
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| cabreh Jul 24, 2009 7:52 AM EDT |
Now I know where to go when I want to be insulted. Being a Linux "user" since late 1993 when I ordered a Yggdrasil CD I find posts like this one rather offensive. I'm not a programmer outside some simple scripting for my work as a systems administrator. I have made bug reports but not any other contribution outside of paying for distributions at different times. Yet I feel I'm being told I'm a "Faux FLOSS Fundamentalist" because I don't happen to agree with Mr. Schlesinger about using MONO and hating Roy Schestowitz (though I can't be bother reading his stuff). A lot of what he seems to be saying about others seems to apply equally well to himself. I personally don't care if others want to use MONO and the handful of applications that use it. I will make no effort to have it totally banned from repositories. But, I likewise want to see it being optional and not a required part of a distribution I use. I've been using Ubuntu pretty much exclusively since the 6.06 release. But, if I can't use upcoming versions without having MONO installed on my system I'll be looking elsewhere. If it comes to the point where there are no versions free of it I may as well just go back to using Windows and have a better .Net experience. |
| number6x Jul 24, 2009 9:10 AM EDT |
I think that being a user is a contribution. You set an example for those around you. Word of mouth is one of the most powerful ways to spread the use of FOSS. Keep filing those bug reports though!(its easy in Ubuntu) |
| KernelShepard Jul 24, 2009 10:25 AM EDT |
cabreh: You might try reading a little more thoroughly. He doesn't say that people who do not contribute code are not part of the real FLOSS community. He only says that people who do nothing but start flamewars and make demands out of feelings of entitlement are the faux community. In fact, if you read the comments, he specifically states that contributions can come in the form of bug reports, code, documentation, translations, etc. He does not limit the contributions to just code like you seem to imply. He's saying that if you don't like Mono, that you have several options (while still being a real FLOSS community member): 1. just apt-get remove it 2. move to another distro 3. get involved and make the Mono alternatives better But don't start flamewars over it, don't try to get people fired over it, and don't make demands. number6x: exactly. Submitting bug reports is a contribution. Spreading a positive word about Linux is also a contribution. Spreading hate against Microsoft does not do anyone any good. Here's what Linus has to say: Quoting:I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease. I believe in open development, and that very much involves not just making the source open, but also not shutting other people and companies out. And I agree with him 100%. And that's what this post seems to be about. |
| Libervis Jul 24, 2009 10:33 AM EDT |
I have to agree KernelShepard. |
| jdixon Jul 24, 2009 10:49 AM EDT |
> have made bug reports but not any other contribution outside of paying for distributions at different times. Yet I feel I'm being told I'm a "Faux FLOSS Fundamentalist" because I don't happen to agree with Mr. Schlesinger about using MONO and hating Roy Schestowitz (though I can't be bother reading his stuff). There is a segment of the "community" which seems to feel that if you're not writing code you're not worth listening to. :( Fortunately, they're a fairly small segment. But yes, I fall into his non-contributor category too. |
| jdixon Jul 24, 2009 10:58 AM EDT |
> He only says that people who do nothing but start flamewars and make demands out of feelings of entitlement are the faux community. And how exactly does he know this is all they do? For all he knows, they could be converting machines to Linux, performing tech support for any number of people, and giving talks explaining Linux at community centers. They could have been using Linux since the days of SLS. None of this would show up on his radar. To him, they'd still be non-contributors. |
| bigg Jul 24, 2009 11:00 AM EDT |
The greater need right now is to write documentation and tutorials, to show others how to use FOSS, to find the best ways to do things easily, and to make the desktop look nice. Programming is critical, but so are all of these other tasks, and at the moment there are not enough contributors in that area. FOSS is about far more than just writing code and posting it on Sourceforge. Edit: And I believe I have made a lot of contributions in those areas. The little bit of code I've released under the GPL is of interest to only a very narrow set of users. |
| KernelShepard Jul 24, 2009 11:06 AM EDT |
jdixon: From reading the comments on BN the past few weeks laughing my arse off, I can say with certainty that these no-name BNers have admitted to not writing code, not writing docs, not being at all involved in Free Software development processes. People like Jose_X, when asked by Lefty, claimed "I don't have the time". Yet they have plenty of time to go around badmouthing people? Something doesn't add up. |
| jdixon Jul 24, 2009 11:11 AM EDT |
> And that's what this post seems to be about. That may be what he intends the post to be about. What the post actually says is: There's a group of people who disagree with me and some others on the mailing lists. The only contribution I ever see out of them is these posts to the mailing lists. Therefore I'm free to reject both them and their opinion, as they don't contribute in any way that I can see. I also don't contribute in any way that he can see, in spite of using Linux for over 15 years now, converting three users to Linux over the past 3 years, having offered tech support both on Usenet and Free Linux Support (when it existed), paying for the occasional Slackware release, and donating small amounts of money to worthwhile Linux activities. Since I also think Mono should be removed from default installations, I guess that makes me a "Faux FLOSS Fundamentalist' too. Apparently there's no room for reasonable people to disagree in David's world. |
| jdixon Jul 24, 2009 11:19 AM EDT |
> ...not being at all involved in Free Software development processes. Lots of people who use Linux and support Linux aren't involved in the Free Software "development process". That's my point. That's not the only way of contributing. It's entirely possible that David is correct, but he's making a judgment using a basis which he has absolutely no way of verifying. Everyone (myself included) does that from time to time, but you should always keep in mind that you can be wrong when you do. I also feel I should point out that disagreeing with someone because of who or what they are rather than disagreeing with their argument is a logical fallacy. While you may end up being correct, you don't disprove their argument. |
| tuxchick Jul 24, 2009 11:21 AM EDT |
Cabreh, you are right. This is just an extension of the "you don't count so shut up" attitude from Joss Mouette and Jo Shields. It's starting to look like the official Mono motto. |
| azerthoth Jul 24, 2009 11:30 AM EDT |
Sorry TC, both sides on that debate are guilty of sticking their fingers in their ears and doing the 'nyah nyah nyah, can't hear you, not listening' en mass. Picking one side of a debate and calling them childish while not pointing out that the other side is just as ridiculous in their approach is IMO just another form of 'nyah nyah'. |
| jdixon Jul 24, 2009 11:36 AM EDT |
> ...both sides on that debate are guilty of sticking their fingers in their ears and doing the 'nyah nyah nyah, can't hear you, not listening' en mass. Azerthoth, that will always happen in any sufficiently large community. :( |
| justintime Jul 24, 2009 12:02 PM EDT |
tuxchick: only ONE side has stooped to trying to destroy people's personal lives and that would be the anti-Mono zealots. Also, afaict from the article here, no one is saying that people who don't like Mono don't "count", he's saying exactly what KernelShepard said above. Now, who's more immature again? (Note: while I know people like jdixon dislike Mono, I'm not going to lump him in with the anti-Mono zealots because he just removes Mono and leaves it at that, rather than going around inciting flamewars and badmouthing developers and trying to discredit Mono developers like you do, tuxchick) Update: I hadn't read through all the blog comments and just found the perfect rebuttal for tuxchick's attempts at character assassination against Lefty: http://opensourcetogo.blogspot.com/2009/07/real-floss-commun... |
| tuxchick Jul 24, 2009 12:39 PM EDT |
Indeed, jdixon, it's tarring with an extremely vague, overly-broad brush that purposefully avoids any specific points of discussion; trying to discredit the people who disagree by calling them "poopyheads", only using thousands of other words, rather than responding to the actual points raised by them. **edit** Of course there are trolls and people who just like to make trouble. Joss, Jo Shields, Lefty S., and Jeffrey Stedfast are trying to make it look like those are the only ones who don't like Mono, and are speaking against it out of malice. |
| jdixon Jul 24, 2009 12:56 PM EDT |
> ...because he just removes Mono and leaves it at that, Actually, I use a distro which doesn't include Mono, but close enough. |
| krisum Jul 24, 2009 1:38 PM EDT |
I completely lost the author there. Why cannot any user who has just been using linux and who has not made any other significant contribution (by his or any other standards) express opinion or question the decisions of those managing a FOSS project he/she may be interested in? As for disruptive elements, they can be anywhere including among those who have made significant contributions to a FOSS project. Actually the real problem is not due to the trolls. The problem has been that otherwise perfectly well meaning people have come down to ad hominem and other kinds of attacks instead of focusing on an issue. Unfortunately even this forum has not been free from this. So, for example, while many among the "anti-Mono" crowd make it appear that those on the other side of the issue are in cahoots with the "evil empire", the "pro-Mono" ones are trying to make the other side appear as zealots or not part of "real" community as in this post. In short, this post is reflective of part of the real problem. |
| theBeez Jul 24, 2009 3:40 PM EDT |
When Torvalds was commenting on Microsoft, it was in the context of the 20,000 lines of code that Microsoft contributed, not Mono, not anti-MS sentiments in general. Although I consider quoting out of context allowed for an editorial, I don't think it is good style to let it go through the community as being a commandment of the Great Chief. I'm certain that is not what Torvalds meant. Torvalds was addressing the people who are against any Microsoft contribution to FOSS. Contrary to Mono, the 20,000 line contribution to the kernel was smelly, but a clear cut case. Microsoft needed these drivers in order to sell Windows as a hypervisor. I'm not a kernel developer, but I think it can be pulled fairly easily if any patent problems arise. This is not the case with Mono. So instead of getting the help of the big chief, I think you should be straight on this. Torvalds didn't speak about Mono, nor about anti-MS feelings in the community in general. Don't spread misinformation. |
| caitlyn Jul 24, 2009 4:06 PM EDT |
I think there is a problem with fundamentalists or zealots or whatever you want to call such people in the Linux and wider FOSS community. I have railed against them before and been roundly flamed for it. The fact is we do have extremists and in that sense the Linus Torvalds quote (which I 100% agree with) is apropos. It isn't about Mono per se but the whole Mono debate ugliness is a symptom of a larger problem. Oh and +1 to KernelShepard. That first post of yours was excellent. |
| krisum Jul 25, 2009 1:01 AM EDT |
@Carla
Quoting: Cabreh, you are right. This is just an extension of the "you don't count so shut up" attitude from Joss Mouette and Jo Shields. It's starting to look like the official Mono motto.While I do not know about their motto, the Mono project has been pretty clear-cut as far as the licensing/patent issues are concerned by way of their official licensing faq and elsewhere. They surely are not the ones responsible (in their capacity of being part of Mono project) for distros including Mono in default installation which is the other point of contention. However, it should be understood that if the "anti-Mono" people are going to pounce on them every now and then and demand that they pack up their project since it is "evil", then the responses cannot be expected to be friendly either. Like I said lack of rational discussion on contentious issues has been the problem in the community. |
| cabreh Jul 25, 2009 4:27 AM EDT |
@KernelShepard > Just apt-get remove it And when that leads to: removing ubuntu-desktop (or whatever distro) that no longer is an option. And that seems to be what a number of people want in some of the distributions. And how long do you think the other distributions will wait before doing exactly the same thing so they can compete? If even Debian goes to MONO you can bet most others will believe it's fine to do so also. @krisum I agree. Some of the development community have a very unhealthy attitude towards "users". Any business that ignores it's customers doesn't usually last long. It can be the same for these people. |
| jdixon Jul 25, 2009 12:39 PM EDT |
> And how long do you think the other distributions will wait before doing exactly the same thing so they can compete? AFAICT, most KDE based distros don't include Mono. It seems to a function of using the Gnome desktop. So I'd guess there will be alternatives available. |
| caitlyn Jul 25, 2009 4:29 PM EDT |
GNOME can be installed without Mono as well. It's a function of the way some distros (mainly Ubuntu and derivatives plus SUSE) create dependencies that make it the Mono way or the highway. It's their packaging that's at fault. In addition to KDE based distros are concerned, many include Mono but they don't, as a rule, install it by default or require it for their default desktop. The same is true for Xfce-based distros. |
| krisum Jul 25, 2009 6:43 PM EDT |
Quoting: And when that leads to: removing ubuntu-desktop (or whatever distro) that no longer is an option. And that seems to be what a number of people want in some of the distributions. Quoting: some distros (mainly Ubuntu and derivatives plus SUSE) create dependencies that make it the Mono way or the highway.Actually, that's not true. I remove mono packages (as well as openoffice, transmission etc) after installing ubuntu without any problems. The ubuntu-desktop meta package only recommends tomboy/f-spot etc. and does not depend on it, so these can be removed without removing any of the meta packages or causing any other packages to be removed. |
| softwarejanitor Jul 25, 2009 6:54 PM EDT |
@krisum It would be useful if you could list which packages to remove to make Ubuntu Mono-free. |
| softwarejanitor Jul 25, 2009 6:56 PM EDT |
Ah... here we go, google to the rescue... sudo apt-get purge libmono0 mono-common libgdiplus That is for 9.04 |
| Sander_Marechal Jul 25, 2009 8:16 PM EDT |
Don't forget to install the anti-mono package after that. It is an empty package that conflicts specifically with the packages softarejanitor mentioned. That way you won't accidentally re-install them because you will be prompted about a conflict that needs to be resolved. |
| softwarejanitor Jul 25, 2009 9:00 PM EDT |
@Sander_Marechal Thanks for the tip, that sounds handy. |
| hkwint Jul 26, 2009 2:27 PM EDT |
Quoting:Don't forget to install the anti-mono package after that. Hilarious, sounds like Debian does have USE-flags after all. Quoting:He's saying that if you don't like Mono, that you have several options But he forgot the most likely option: 4. Fork (or should I say: Remix?) Ubuntu together with other people disliking Mono. Probably not worth the hassle given how simple it is to remove Mono, but if you really care, why not fork? |
| cabreh Jul 27, 2009 2:41 AM EDT |
@krisum I wasn't saying that removing MONO from Ubuntu removes the desktop NOW. I know that since I've removed it. I was talking about the future releases after MONO has become the default install and programs like GIMP have been removed. This may not atually happen, but if it does they lose me as a consumer of their product. |
| krisum Jul 27, 2009 11:32 AM EDT |
Quoting: I wasn't saying that removing MONO from Ubuntu removes the desktop NOW.Sorry, I misread your comment. It looks very unlikely, though, since current way of packaging has the desktop meta-package depend on only the minimum base GNOME packages while it recommends all the other applications (including firefox et al). Now if base GNOME adds a dependency on Mono then it is another matter ... |
| justintime Jul 27, 2009 11:55 AM EDT |
cabreh: your comment expressing fear about Mono somehow replacing GIMP is unfounded. That discussion was about the LiveCD only. Not about the default install. And AFAIK, it was only a proposal by someone - it is not set in stone. In case you weren't aware, a LiveCD is only for evaluation purposes - so someone can run it for a short while to see if they'd like to give it a real chance by installing it. It's not meant as a way to get real work done (don't expect people to do full photo editing on a LiveCD). LiveCD's are also aimed at the average joe user, not the professional artist or anything, and so it *might* make sense to drop GIMP if F-Spot has all the commonly used photo editing features. I'm sure they'd consider the same thing even if F-Spot was written in C or C++. This isn't some Mono conspiracy. |
| cabreh Jul 27, 2009 5:10 PM EDT |
@justintime Actually for Ubuntu the LiveCD is the main installation source. And yes I know about the alternate CD. But, it's called alternate for a reason. So, if GIMP were removed from the LiveCD for Ubuntu you would have to install it after the install. Again, my comments are based on "if". Not that these are the situations. P.S. Under Ubuntu there are a number of packages that to me seem not to be Gnome essential that if removed call for the ubuntu-desktop package to be removed. As an example, try removing Evolution and tell me what it says about other packages to be removed. So, if you use Thunderbird and don't need Evolution, you MAY have to keep it in any case. |
| krisum Jul 27, 2009 5:48 PM EDT |
Quoting: Under Ubuntu there are a number of packages that to me seem not to be Gnome essential that if removed call for the ubuntu-desktop package to be removed. As an example, try removing Evolution and tell me what it says about other packages to be removed. So, if you use Thunderbird and don't need Evolution, you MAY have to keep it in any case.Have you checked it or are you just guessing? For both hardy and jaunty releases I have thunderbird installed and evolution removed, while keeping the ubuntu-desktop meta-package. For reference, see http://packages.ubuntu.com/jaunty/ubuntu-desktop for the actual depends and recommends in case you do not have a ubuntu installation at hand. So far I do not see anything that does not make sense as a depends. |
| Sander_Marechal Jul 27, 2009 6:02 PM EDT |
@Cabreh: The only tricky thing with Evolution is that you need to watch out with the Evolution Calendar. The clock panel widget in Gnome has a calendar function that uses Evolution to store it's data. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!