On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 12:31:02PM -0800, Eric Gaumer wrote: > On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 13:36 -0500, Barry Hawkins wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Eric Gaumer wrote: > > [...] > > | If you feel so passionate about free software then lets boycott the use > > | of Java. Who is willing to go that far for their beliefs? > > | > > | Like I mentioned earlier, dump Java and start supporting mono. It's > > | fully open and could easily rival Java. C# already fixes all the > > | nuisances and problems Java has. It is what Java wanted to be. > > > > Eric, > > ~ Your claim that Mono "could easily rival Java" is rather general and > > quite unfounded. If you want to start a thread on Mono advocacy, then > > feel free, but the issue at hand is appropriately respecting licenses. > > ~ There are people on the Debian development teams who have gone to > > great lengths to ensure that order and propriety are maintained within > > the Debian packaging system, including observance of and adherence to > > licenses. If you are going to flout adherence to licensing, please keep > > it to yourself and cease with this relativistic rhetoric. > > Nobody is mocking the license, we're just trying clarify what exactly it > permits. > > If you have a degree in IP law then please comment, if not then I'm not > interested in your ad hoc opinion of how to interpret the license or in > some lecture on moral ethics. > > I wish everyone would stop saying that mono is irrelevant. It is > absolutely relevant to this entire topic. We are arguing over licensing > issues. Mono is free and Java is not. C# is geared at superseding Java.
C# is an attempt of Microsoft to take more controll over the program we write, and should be avoided if possible. Friendly, Sven Luther
