PDA

View Full Version : .NET framework libraries to be released.


strikeforce
18th October 2007, 04:36 PM
Well with the approval by the OSI about their license being Open Source by definition Microsoft is releasing the Source for .NET.

http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2007/10/03/releasing-the-source-code-for-the-net-framework-libraries.aspx

One of the things my team has been working to enable has been the ability for .NET developers to download and browse the source code of the .NET Framework libraries, and to easily enable debugging support in them.

Today I'm excited to announce that we'll be providing this with the .NET 3.5 and VS 2008 release later this year.

We'll begin by offering the source code (with source file comments included) for the .NET Base Class Libraries (System, System.IO, System.Collections, System.Configuration, System.Threading, System.Net, System.Security, System.Runtime, System.Text, etc), ASP.NET (System.Web), Windows Forms (System.Windows.Forms), ADO.NET (System.Data), XML (System.Xml), and WPF (System.Windows). We'll then be adding more libraries in the months ahead (including WCF, Workflow, and LINQ). The source code will be released under the Microsoft Reference License (MS-RL).


OSI approves thread I made the other day is located here.
http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=169314

rjstaaf
18th October 2007, 04:49 PM
And on the same note the CDC is warning that Drug Resistant Staph infections are on the rise...

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/conditions/10/16/mrsa.cdc.ap/index.html

Sorry, couldn't resist ;) Not quite sure if you are touting this as good news or bad??

This is not an Open Source license, Microsoft is releasing .NET with a "reference" license which allows developers to "look" at the source code. Once you do, you will be permanently branded with the MS logo on your forehead!

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2191754,00.asp

I don't even have the .NET framework installed on my Windows machines, I definitely don't want it or anything developed from it on my Linux machines :)

FriedChips
18th October 2007, 04:57 PM
And on the same note the CDC is warning that Drug Resistant Staph infections are on the rise...

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/conditions/10/16/mrsa.cdc.ap/index.html

Sorry, couldn't resist ;) Not quite sure if you are touting this as good news or bad??

This is not an Open Source license, Microsoft is releasing .NET with a "reference" license which allows developers to "look" at the source code. Once you do, you will be permanently branded with the MS logo on your forehead!

I don't even have the .NET framework installed on my Windows machines, I definitely don't want it or anything developed from it on my Linux machines :)

I couldn't agree more, they can keep the mono junk too.

Dan
18th October 2007, 05:42 PM
<----- Ayup!

InfRecursion
18th October 2007, 07:58 PM
You guys must not be forced to code for winbloze. :)

strikeforce
18th October 2007, 11:36 PM
I'm unsure whether I think it's good or bad. At the moment I think I'm indifferent to it. I see it as a benefit to for mono developers but thats as far as what I consider.

.NET is getting quite big in windows programming so to me making it cross-platform is pretty important I think.

Dan
18th October 2007, 11:43 PM
Hmmm.

You can quote me on this:

"Remember when making personal, political and business deals,
that in any bargain with the devil -- or his minions --
you will always be the junior partner."


Dan

Dies
19th October 2007, 12:07 AM
I'm unsure whether I think it's good or bad. At the moment I think I'm indifferent to it. I see it as a benefit to for mono developers but thats as far as what I consider.

.NET is getting quite big in windows programming so to me making it cross-platform is pretty important I think.

I feel the same way.

For example

http://www.getpaint.net/

Is a neat little "photoshop-like" .NET app that I would love to see ported to Linux, I think it would be a great alternative for those that dislike the Gimp's interface.

contraculto
19th October 2007, 03:12 AM
I feel the same way.

For example

http://www.getpaint.net/

Is a neat little "photoshop-like" .NET app that I would love to see ported to Linux, I think it would be a great alternative for those that dislike the Gimp's interface.

then what about gimpshop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIMPshop) or running photoshop through wine (cs2 is rated gold). using microsoft's propietary code defeats the purpose of a free operating system.

see this: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html

Dan
19th October 2007, 03:17 AM
The regular GIMP works just fine, thank you very much!

Examples provided on demand!


Dan

Wayne
19th October 2007, 03:20 AM
Did someone mention Mono? :eek: Bad language like that is forbidden in the forum :D

Wayne

Dies
19th October 2007, 03:22 AM
then what about gimpshop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIMPshop) or running photoshop through wine (cs2 is rated gold). using microsoft's propietary code defeats the purpose of a free operating system.

see this: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html

No offense but GimpShop is just Gimp, a silly mod of it. IMHO
I'll just use regular old Gimp or reboot. :cool:

As far as the "free" software philosophy, it's nice, but don't expect everyone to care deeply about that, ever.

Aside from the fact that to me the freedom to run whatever I please/need/want on my system is the whole point, though it seems that may have been lost on some. Or maybe I just misunderstand freedom. ;)

tw2113
19th October 2007, 05:01 AM
Gimp can always evolve, I know they've heard a lot of ideas concerning the UI and I imagine they'll consider them

hermouche
19th October 2007, 06:14 AM
And on the same note the CDC is warning that Drug Resistant Staph infections are on the rise...

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/conditions/10/16/mrsa.cdc.ap/index.html

Sorry, couldn't resist ;) Not quite sure if you are touting this as good news or bad??

This is not an Open Source license, Microsoft is releasing .NET with a "reference" license which allows developers to "look" at the source code. Once you do, you will be permanently branded with the MS logo on your forehead!

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2191754,00.asp

I don't even have the .NET framework installed on my Windows machines, I definitely don't want it or anything developed from it on my Linux machines :)


Yes definitely right:
prevention being better than cure

red

ppesci
19th October 2007, 07:23 AM
If you can talk about .NET things, this is the wrong forum. That M$ move can't be used by mono developers. Read the license to know you can do exactly nothing with the code, except help M$ sue Linux developers/distributions about unauthorized use of it.

For more information, go to this thread:
http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?p=879855

riddlermarc
19th October 2007, 07:31 AM
As a long-term Linux user but a jobbing .Net programmer I am interested in this - means to do some basic testing and coding I will be able to use my existing Fedora workstation and not have to RDP onto one of my 2003 Server boxes.. just remember all you naysayers you don't *have* to use this, it's a tool if you need it. As has been said though, Mono is a little weak and I haven't read up on this latest MS offering but will do so after F8 is released and safely installed at home!

strikeforce
19th October 2007, 09:00 AM
If you can talk about .NET things, this is the wrong forum. That M$ move can't be used by mono developers. Read the license to know you can do exactly nothing with the code, except help M$ sue Linux developers/distributions about unauthorized use of it.

For more information, go to this thread:
http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?p=879855

That's a poll about mono it has nothing to do with the thread we are talking about. I linked the post related to some licenses Microsoft are releasing. I'm personally not saying its valid or not I'm just saying it's interesting.

Personally Gimp is fine the way it is. I've tried gimpshop seemed really buggy for me.

Mono is another tool nothing else. You may not like it and thats your choice but it's the choice of other people who program to use it. Sometimes a company you work for will choose mono that's life. I would prefer if people were capable of programming .NET on linux than having to be forced to dual-boot just to program .NET on a windows partition.

To say that you can't do anything with that license and thats it useless is a bit much. It provides mono dev's with a source to look at.

rjstaaf
19th October 2007, 12:30 PM
Just keep in mind that as a programmer you will likely get banned from many "FOSS" projects if you have even had a glance at proprietary code. This is the case with Mono.

http://www.mono-project.com/Contributing

Important Rules

* If you have looked at Microsoft's implementation of .NET or their shared source code, you will not be able to contribute to Mono.

* In general, be careful when you are implementing free software and you have access to proprietary code. We need to make sure that we are not using someone else's copyrighted code accidentally.

* Do not use the ildasm, reflector or other equivalent tools program to disassemble proprietary code when you are planning to reimplement a class for Mono. If you have done this, we will not be able to use your code.

* Please stick to published documentation for implementing any classes; when in doubt, post to the mailing list and discuss the possible approaches with others.

ppesci
19th October 2007, 03:16 PM
That was I try to say. No bias here. Anyway mono is a waste of resources.

Thanks rjstaaf to point to the right thing.

Now, how mono dev ppl can be sure none of the contributors has the M$ code and put some lines of it in the project?. Nobody can be sure unless he or she has the code, but that assure he/she can't be in the project.

I saw a M$ sue the mono project sometime in future, spreading FUD over linux. :(

Dies
21st October 2007, 01:49 AM
Gimp can always evolve, I know they've heard a lot of ideas concerning the UI and I imagine they'll consider them

Yup, everything should evolve and improve over time.

I just love how anytime you say anything about the Gimp's interface people come out of the woodwork to defend it. :D

If anyone actually read my post then they should have noticed that I never said I dislike Gimp, I'm used to it and I use it just fine, though I do think there's room for improvement. ;)

What I did say was that Paint.net was a cool little app that I think a lot of new and even old users would enjoy. It was just an example of a cool free .net app.

RJFUatHOME
21st October 2007, 03:52 AM
psssssssst!

Not that I want to hijack this thread, but since you are mentioning it Dies, now is your chance to make those Gimp improvement suggestions you've been dreaming of.

I've made mine....

http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com/

Dan
21st October 2007, 04:03 AM
Personally, I wish they'd leave the damn toolbox well enough alone! I have absolutely NO desire to have to commit the location and layout of another gob of gadgets to memory! <..:mad:..>

tw2113
21st October 2007, 05:09 AM
I've been having fun with Inkscape lately for some various fedora artwork needs

Dies
23rd October 2007, 03:33 PM
psssssssst!

Not that I want to hijack this thread, but since you are mentioning it Dies, now is your chance to make those Gimp improvement suggestions you've been dreaming of.

I've made mine....

http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com/

Hey, thanks for the link. I'm really liking what I see over there, nice ideas.

I think I'll leave them alone, only because I would probably want them to just copy the Adobe/Macromedia style user interface right off the bat, while they seem to want to work their way there a little slower. :D

RJFUatHOME
23rd October 2007, 06:11 PM
I'm pretty much into the Adobe style interface myself since using photoshop since version 4 on the mac and then thru windows to CS. My suggestion kinda reflects that. The second and third image on this page under Single Context are my suggestions:

http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com/2007_10_07_archive.html

Thetargos
23rd October 2007, 07:07 PM
I'm pretty much into the Adobe style interface myself since using photoshop since version 4 on the mac and then thru windows to CS. My suggestion kinda reflects that. The second and third image on this page under Single Context are my suggestions:

http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com/2007_10_07_archive.html
I agree with your proposal, except that I don't like the "single window framework" approach, it simply is a window to house the menu bar (to me it is a Windows approach to Mac's unified Menu bar)... I'm much more used to the right-click context menu in GIMP (since it was the only menu in 1.x). I reckon, though that it requires at least buttons or menu entries on the "main" toolbar (or other) window for the standard File, Exts, Help menus... though they coul easily become "tool buttons with menus". Now having into account that GTK allows for "floating bars" maybe this could be addressed with a floating "menu bar" just as there are floating tool bars ;)

Another thing that I've grown used to on GIMP is the tool's properties in the tool's window, finer, faster tool control... In the only version of PS that I've used (Elements 3, which came with my Wacom Tablet), I find it too cumbersome to control individual tool's properties... Maybe I'm not all that proficient and it is actually easier than I think, but the fact that in GIMP "They're there" makes it quite easy to locate.

Dies
23rd October 2007, 11:20 PM
I'm pretty much into the Adobe style interface myself since using photoshop since version 4 on the mac and then thru windows to CS. My suggestion kinda reflects that. The second and third image on this page under Single Context are my suggestions:

http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com/2007_10_07_archive.html

Ah, cool I hadn't seen that one. Nice I like it.

Though I do prefer the Macromedia style with the different dialogs being like "drawers" that you can just open and close as you need them. The tool menu should definitely take on that lean Photoshop style though. :cool:

You don't even need the menu bar since you can access it through a right click, maybe an option to hide.

I would probably put a tab bar at the top too, instead of minimizing things. With the first tab being a link to templates, options, etc.


@ Thetargos

That's kind of why I keep those type of suggestions to myself, a lot of Linux users dislike the one window approach.

Though the truth is I'm not sure why since in essence it works the same.
You only have one window, but you can still easily work on multiple projects. It's just like a second desktop, a stage, that's all.

The one window approach really sucks if you have a crappy monitor, low res, but then you probably shouldn't be working with graphics. :D

Maybe they should do like Azureus and include both interfaces and make it easy to switch between them ?

Thetargos
24th October 2007, 12:16 AM
Maybe they should do like Azureus and include both interfaces and make it easy to switch between them ?
Now that would be definitely cool! UI templates!

RJFUatHOME
24th October 2007, 01:21 AM
The reason I like an application backdrop window like in Photoshop is because it organizes everything into a single application, but mainly because I hate seeing my wallpaper on the desktop when working on images. The wallpaper tosses a wrench into my perception when working on photos and my color sense gets skewed by the wallpaper!

I can't wait to see what the Gimp team ends up incorporating in the end though.

clearer
28th October 2007, 08:50 AM
Maybe a more neutral wallpaper would be in order... if only we had a wallpaper program that could dynamicly switch what image was used based on what program was in focus...

strikeforce
28th October 2007, 10:23 AM
We will have a wallpaper program that will change colour when there is a change in the time of day soon.

Thats a step in the right direction.

clearer
28th October 2007, 05:54 PM
Thats cool

Dan
28th October 2007, 06:29 PM
http://www.fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?t=168235 posts 68~75


Dan

Ranchi - Dombivli Travel Photos - Jalandhar Instagram Photos -