On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 09:36:34AM +0100, Ron Yorston wrote: > "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >On Mon, 2008-06-02 at 03:28 +0100, Keith G. Robertson-Turner wrote: > >> Why are you still shipping Mono? > > > >Apologies in advance, I cannot be overly specific about legal issues. > >Red Hat (and I) are aware of your concerns around mono, and after > >discussing this in depth with Red Hat Legal, we have no immediate plans > >to remove mono from Fedora. > > Never mind the legal stuff, is there any technical reason for having > Mono in the core distribution? (Or in the distribution at all.) [...] In the distribution at all to give people choice. You could make the same argument for other minority languages or applications, OCaml for instance. Maybe we should remove any amateur radio software or electronic CAD or 2D games or support for Norwegian language users. All of those are minorities. As long as there is someone willing to support a package and there are no legal or packaging problems, we should have it in. One thing that Debian has is a huge range of very obscure packages. > With Java itself now Free Software why bother with Mono? .Net/CLR potentially has better support for functional programming, although unfortunately there are no mainstream free languages out there which exploit this (see my signature however). There are also various fairly minor but technically useful improvements in the bytecode, eg. Java has an annoying limit on the size of methods and doesn't allow you to jump between methods (meaning that tail-call optimization can't be done in many useful cases). Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones Read my OCaml programming blog: http://camltastic.blogspot.com/ Fedora now supports 59 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#) http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
