Re: [DotGNU]Call for a truce over mono vs pnet

[Paolo Molaro]

On 03/16/02 Rhys Weatherley wrote:
> However, I have always had a problem with the attitude
> that pnet exists to bootstrap mono, and then mono doesn't
> need pnet any more after that.

I don't think any mono developer thinks pnet is a tool to bootstrap
mono. It's a different project, with some of the same goals and
different ways to get there. 
Besides, mono can bootstrap itself, now, it doesn't need a separate C#
compiler.

> Make a realistic and respectful offer on co-operation,
> and we can begin to move forward from the current
> stalemate.

I already made an offer yesterday, let's make it again:
we (mono developers) will help you bootstrap your corlib so DotGNU
doesn't have to rely anymore on microsoft software. You'll likely
increase a lot your developer base, because they'll be able to compile
your core C# library on free systems.
Mono advantage will be bug reports and likely fixes so that later we'll
be able to compile our corlib with mcs as well.

It seems fair to me: we both get advantages, you'll have a completely free
system sooner and with an expanded developer base. We get enhancements
to our compiler/reflection.

lupus

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
address@hidden                                     debian/rules
address@hidden                             Monkeys do it better