[Kde-bindings] some info needed

[Arno Rehn]

On Tuesday 22 June 2010 21:08:04 Richard Dale wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 22, 2010 01:00:33 am Arno Rehn wrote:
> > On Tuesday 22 June 2010 01:22:55 Richard Dale wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 21, 2010 07:58:51 pm Arno Rehn wrote:
> > > > Currently I don't have much ambitions to carry on working on
> > > > Qyoto/Kimono, since not many people are using it and it's a closed
> > > > platform after all. I'm CC'ing the kdebindings ML, so other people
> > > > can help as well.
> > > 
> > > I think that would be a great shame. I'm sorry I've done nothing to
> > > help out with Qyotoassemblygen, and feel that I should have done more.
> > > In combination with using the Smoke runtime, it is the most innovative
> > > C# bindings project out there.
> > 
> > It's certainly not that I haven't had enough enough help and/or support
> > from your side. I agree that SMOKE is the most advanced C++ bindings
> > technology out there and we really have top-quality C# bindings.
> > 
> > > We should certainly get projects like Qyotoassemblygen and smokegen
> > > onto git instead of in kdebindings. I think the fact we are stuff in
> > > kdebindings using svn is beginning to damage the bindings projects.
> > 
> > qyotoassemblygen is already on gitorious.
> 
> Oh come to think of it I think you had already told me that. So should
> kdebindings put the non-kde specific parts of the tools on gitorious to
> encourage maximum co-operation with other gitorious based projects like Qt
> and MeeGo?
Yes, I think that'd be best. We would then also be independent of the KDE 
release schedules, which do not always fit well for the Qt-only parts.

> > > Why do
> > > we put so much effort into  KDE based bindings when 90% of people only
> > > want to use the Qt-only ones? I don't know.
> > > 
> > > I agree we've had zero success with getting anyone to use the Kimono
> > > KDE C# bindings, although I think there has been some interest in the
> > > Qyoto side. Maybe we haven't put enough effort into hyping and
> > > blogging about what we have, or telling the Mono community about it. i
> > > still feel there is a lot of potential in the project when other C#
> > > bindings seem quite popular. For instance, like on the iPhone and I
> > > wonder if there might be a place for a libdui/MeeGo Touch development
> > > environment.
> > 
> > It's just that I come to think that C# bindings will have no success in
> > the F/OSS community. There are a few people who don't care whether .NET
> > is a closed platform and therefore develop and use .NET software even on
> > Linux and other open OSes. However, the number of these people seems to
> > be extremely low.
> 
> I'm not so sure that is true, there are quite a few people using Mono I
> think. Just because there aren't many killer applications that are bundled
> with distributions like Kubuntu (there are killer C# applications for
> Ubuntu) doesn't necessarily mean that people aren't writing custom
> in-house applications, or playing around with the development environment
> in their spare time just to 'learn stuff'. I not sure there will ever be a
> KDE killer application written in Python, Ruby or C#, but that doesn't
> mean we have failed in producing very nice development environments for
> those languages. Not everyone wants to rewrite konqueror in Perl, but they
> might want to hack up a cut down browser in Perl using QtWebKit to deliver
> a custom app in much less time than it would have taken in C++ for their
> company's invoicing department.
As for the killer applications for Ubuntu/GNOME: Tomboy was replaced by 
Gnotes, F-Spot by Solang. If software is being replaced in a distribution just 
because it's written in C#, I think this really shows the attitude of people 
towards Mono and .NET.

> > Mono/.NET applications will never be treated as 1st class citizens (not
> > even 2nd class, I'd say) in any of the larger projects, like GNOME or
> > KDE, simply because .NET is a closed platform. Microsoft could make
> > every promise they want for not sueing people, but as long as they don't
> > open up the platform, .NET will never be accepted in the F/OSS world.
> > And they even have a point here: As long as there are efforts to support
> > .NET on other OSes, including Linux and OS X, all the closed Microsoft
> > stuff will spread and push the open alternatives aside.
> 
> We are not supporting .NET, we are providing a nice Mono based C#
> development environment, and that is not the same thing at all. I don't
> care about C# apps not being first class citizens in KDE because the
> reality is that no non-C++ language is a first class citizen. That
> includes QtJambi too. The one language that might become a first class
> citizen in KDE is probably JavaScript. We are not spreading 'closed
> Microsoft stuff', we are just providing a nice development environment for
> an interesting programming language (C#). The implication of this
> 'spreading closed Microsoft stuff' is that somehow developers are victims
> who aren't in control. Once a developer has been infected with the C# way
> of doing things, they will never be able to change. That is just rubbish.
> A poor programmer might always want to program in the language they first
> learned, like C#, Java or COBOL. But a good programmer can adapt in about
> a week. As far as I'm concerned if the good programmers aren't locked into
> one language, who cares about the average/bad programmers. Developers are
> not victims of giant cash rich corporations like Microsoft, quite the
> opposite, we are actually in charge - they nead us, we don't need them.
Well yes, but developing in/for Mono and C# makes me a little uneasy, 
nevertheless. After all I'm developing for a platform that I have no control 
over, whatsoever. My only choice here is take it or ditch it. That doesn't 
have to mean that the platform is bad - actually .NET is quite a nice 
platform. But still, I am not allowed to modify it if I discover something 
that I don't like. And that's just not very F/OSS, which gives me a bit of a 
headache currently.

> > A very popular case currently is Silverlight. It's bad enough that there
> > is Flash, which is also a closed platform, but now even Silverlight apps
> > start to flood the internet. And that decreases chances again for HTML5.
> 
> I don't buy this argument, from the point of view of Qt/KDE programmers
> using the bindings we have developed, C# is just another programming
> language. I don't care about Silverlight, but the main thing wrong with it
> is that is uses proprietary codecs. I does use a very nice .NET runtime
> that works well with dynamic languages like IronPython. HTML5 is no better
> that Flash or Silverlight if it uses the same proprietary crap like H.264
> instead of Free codecs like the new Google one.
True, you got a point here.

Maybe we should blog about this discussion a bit. It would certainly raise 
awareness of Qyoto/Kimono and we'd also get community responses regarding the 
topic.

-- 
Arno Rehn
arno at arnorehn.de