Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
I want your opinion about that topic, should we add moonlight to the extra repo? And please don't give answers like: "What do we want with this Micr**** shit?". We have closed source software like flashplayer in our repos, so why not add an open source product which do nearly the same (not seen as compatible to flash, instead nearly same technology, etc.).
I would maintain it, because it belongs to mono (more or less).
Some information about moonlight: --------------------------------- The project page is here: http://mono-project.com/Moonlight
The license shouldn't be a problem, it's distributed under open source licenses. More information on the project page or here: http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianMonoGroup/Moonlight (which are the information of the debian mono group).
If you want try moonlight, feel free to build it on your own from my submitted PKGBUILD in the AUR (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23384).
If you need some webpages to test moonlight: http://go-mono.com/moonlight/MoonlightStatus.aspx
Cheers, Daniel
If you have time and desire to maintain the package, why not add it?
In my point of view the big problem here was find a maintainer.
-- Hugo
Daniel Isenmann schrieb:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
First thought: I don't care. I have never come across anything that needs Silverlight/Moonlight.
Second thought: If I ever come across a site that needs it, I'd be happy if it would be available with pacman -S moonlight.
Third thought: I still don't care, and I won't until I come across the situation in my second thought.
So if you want to maintain it, do it. If not, then don't.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 19:47, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
First thought: I don't care. I have never come across anything that needs Silverlight/Moonlight.
Second thought: If I ever come across a site that needs it, I'd be happy if it would be available with pacman -S moonlight.
Third thought: I still don't care, and I won't until I come across the situation in my second thought.
So if you want to maintain it, do it. If not, then don't.
+1
Am Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:47:22 +0100 schrieb Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org:
Daniel Isenmann schrieb:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
First thought: I don't care. I have never come across anything that needs Silverlight/Moonlight.
Second thought: If I ever come across a site that needs it, I'd be happy if it would be available with pacman -S moonlight.
Third thought: I still don't care, and I won't until I come across the situation in my second thought.
So if you want to maintain it, do it. If not, then don't.
In some way I don't care too. If you want to maintain then do it.
But I see no need to do this in our official extra repository. I haven't come across one single website using it. So I see no reason for an exception from our rules here. We should do what we do with all other packages: put it into AUR and wait how important it will become. The number of votes will be one point. An increasing number of websites using it may be the other one.
-Andy
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Andreas Radke a.radke@arcor.de wrote:
Am Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:47:22 +0100 schrieb Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org:
Daniel Isenmann schrieb:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
First thought: I don't care. I have never come across anything that needs Silverlight/Moonlight.
Second thought: If I ever come across a site that needs it, I'd be happy if it would be available with pacman -S moonlight.
Third thought: I still don't care, and I won't until I come across the situation in my second thought.
So if you want to maintain it, do it. If not, then don't.
In some way I don't care too. If you want to maintain then do it.
But I see no need to do this in our official extra repository. I haven't come across one single website using it. So I see no reason for an exception from our rules here. We should do what we do with all other packages: put it into AUR and wait how important it will become. The number of votes will be one point. An increasing number of websites using it may be the other one.
-Andy
I agree with Andy. We should keep it in AUR for a while to see if it's popular enough to be in the extra repo. |Anyway, I'm sharing everyone sentiment of not caring.
Eric Bélanger wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Andreas Radke a.radke@arcor.de wrote:
Am Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:47:22 +0100 schrieb Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org:
Daniel Isenmann schrieb:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
First thought: I don't care. I have never come across anything that needs Silverlight/Moonlight.
Second thought: If I ever come across a site that needs it, I'd be happy if it would be available with pacman -S moonlight.
Third thought: I still don't care, and I won't until I come across the situation in my second thought.
So if you want to maintain it, do it. If not, then don't.
In some way I don't care too. If you want to maintain then do it.
But I see no need to do this in our official extra repository. I haven't come across one single website using it. So I see no reason for an exception from our rules here. We should do what we do with all other packages: put it into AUR and wait how important it will become. The number of votes will be one point. An increasing number of websites using it may be the other one.
-Andy
I agree with Andy. We should keep it in AUR for a while to see if it's popular enough to be in the extra repo. |Anyway, I'm sharing everyone sentiment of not caring.
I think AUR is the place for it initially. Even if just to show that six emails to arch-general does not get what you want...
Other than that, I am in a state of utter ambivalence.
Allan
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Daniel Isenmann schrieb:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo
(http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
First thought: I don't care. I have never come across anything that needs Silverlight/Moonlight.
Second thought: If I ever come across a site that needs it, I'd be happy if it would be available with pacman -S moonlight.
Third thought: I still don't care, and I won't until I come across the situation in my second thought.
So if you want to maintain it, do it. If not, then don't.
This is my sentiment too. I've never needed Silver/Moon-light for anything. I even used to use it for work at my last job, but I never needed to visit those sites in Linux. That said: the recent US Inauguration was broadcast with Silverlight, so it is seeing some use.
I will echo Thomas' point: I don't care, but if I need to care at some point, pacman -S moonlight would be great.
+1 for inclusion as long as you have the desire to maintain it.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Daniel Isenmann schrieb:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo
(
http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
First thought: I don't care. I have never come across anything that needs Silverlight/Moonlight.
Second thought: If I ever come across a site that needs it, I'd be happy
if
it would be available with pacman -S moonlight.
Third thought: I still don't care, and I won't until I come across the situation in my second thought.
So if you want to maintain it, do it. If not, then don't.
This is my sentiment too. I've never needed Silver/Moon-light for anything. I even used to use it for work at my last job, but I never needed to visit those sites in Linux. That said: the recent US Inauguration was broadcast with Silverlight, so it is seeing some use.
I will echo Thomas' point: I don't care, but if I need to care at some point, pacman -S moonlight would be great.
+1 for inclusion as long as you have the desire to maintain it.
I add ny +1 to this group.
Am Freitag 23 Januar 2009 19:08:09 schrieb Daniel Isenmann:
If you want try moonlight, feel free to build it on your own from my submitted PKGBUILD in the AUR (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23384).
I am surprised that it does not require mono at runtime. I have tested it with Firefox; but the demo linked at the silverlight page complains that I need to enable moonlighjt 2 support.
Konqueror detects the plugin but it does just nothing. Annd Opera segfaults. :-) Accoriding to their website only Firefox is supported. Its a shame that all open source Flash alternatives (gnash, swfdec) only support Firefox. Adobe's flash runs with every browser...
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:34:40 +0100 Pierre Schmitz pierre@archlinux.de wrote:
Am Freitag 23 Januar 2009 19:08:09 schrieb Daniel Isenmann:
If you want try moonlight, feel free to build it on your own from my submitted PKGBUILD in the AUR (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23384).
I am surprised that it does not require mono at runtime. I have tested it with Firefox; but the demo linked at the silverlight page complains that I need to enable moonlighjt 2 support.
Moonlight only supports Silverlight 1. Silverlight 2 will be supported with the next version. Moonlight is completly written in C/C++ and doesn't need mono. The next moonlight version with Silverlight 2 support needs mono.
Konqueror detects the plugin but it does just nothing. Annd Opera segfaults. :-) Accoriding to their website only Firefox is supported. Its a shame that all open source Flash alternatives (gnash, swfdec) only support Firefox. Adobe's flash runs with every browser...
I have only tested it with Firefox. Good to know that the other browsers not really works with Moonlight.
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:08:09 +0100 Daniel Isenmann daniel.isenmann@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
I want your opinion about that topic, should we add moonlight to the extra repo? And please don't give answers like: "What do we want with this Micr**** shit?". We have closed source software like flashplayer in our repos, so why not add an open source product which do nearly the same (not seen as compatible to flash, instead nearly same technology, etc.).
I would maintain it, because it belongs to mono (more or less).
Some information about moonlight:
The project page is here: http://mono-project.com/Moonlight
The license shouldn't be a problem, it's distributed under open source licenses. More information on the project page or here: http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianMonoGroup/Moonlight (which are the information of the debian mono group).
If you want try moonlight, feel free to build it on your own from my submitted PKGBUILD in the AUR (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23384).
If you need some webpages to test moonlight: http://go-mono.com/moonlight/MoonlightStatus.aspx
Cheers, Daniel
Small update on the further processing. At the moment the plugin get 11 votes in the AUR. I plan to let it stay in AUR unless it get a little popular and maybe more votes. So, if the number of webpages which uses silverlight/moonlight increase a lot, I will push it to the extra repo. Until then it will stay in AUR.
Cheers, Daniel
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:34:14 +0100 Daniel Isenmann daniel.isenmann@gmx.de wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:08:09 +0100 Daniel Isenmann daniel.isenmann@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
I want your opinion about that topic, should we add moonlight to the extra repo? And please don't give answers like: "What do we want with this Micr**** shit?". We have closed source software like flashplayer in our repos, so why not add an open source product which do nearly the same (not seen as compatible to flash, instead nearly same technology, etc.).
I would maintain it, because it belongs to mono (more or less).
Some information about moonlight:
The project page is here: http://mono-project.com/Moonlight
The license shouldn't be a problem, it's distributed under open source licenses. More information on the project page or here: http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianMonoGroup/Moonlight (which are the information of the debian mono group).
If you want try moonlight, feel free to build it on your own from my submitted PKGBUILD in the AUR (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23384).
If you need some webpages to test moonlight: http://go-mono.com/moonlight/MoonlightStatus.aspx
Cheers, Daniel
Small update on the further processing. At the moment the plugin get 11 votes in the AUR. I plan to let it stay in AUR unless it get a little popular and maybe more votes. So, if the number of webpages which uses silverlight/moonlight increase a lot, I will push it to the extra repo. Until then it will stay in AUR.
Cheers, Daniel
Next update to moonlight in ArchLinux: It will be moved to [community]. It has reached at the moment 31 votes and Timm Preetz (aka gummibaerchen) is taking care of it in the community repo. So, you will be able to do a "pacman -S moonlight" to install it, if you need it.
Cheers, Daniel
On Sunday 15 February 2009 07:08:46 am Daniel Isenmann wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:34:14 +0100
Daniel Isenmann daniel.isenmann@gmx.de wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:08:09 +0100
Daniel Isenmann daniel.isenmann@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not adding moonlight to the repo (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-
January/003326.ht
ml).
Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of view.
I want your opinion about that topic, should we add moonlight to the extra repo? And please don't give answers like: "What do we want with this Micr**** shit?". We have closed source software like flashplayer in our repos, so why not add an open source product which do nearly the same (not seen as compatible to flash, instead nearly same technology, etc.).
I would maintain it, because it belongs to mono (more or less).
Some information about moonlight:
The project page is here: http://mono-project.com/Moonlight
The license shouldn't be a problem, it's distributed under open source licenses. More information on the project page or here: http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianMonoGroup/Moonlight (which are the information of the debian mono group).
If you want try moonlight, feel free to build it on your own from my submitted PKGBUILD in the AUR (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23384).
If you need some webpages to test moonlight: http://go-mono.com/moonlight/MoonlightStatus.aspx
Cheers, Daniel
Small update on the further processing. At the moment the plugin get 11 votes in the AUR. I plan to let it stay in AUR unless it get a little popular and maybe more votes. So, if the number of webpages which uses silverlight/moonlight increase a lot, I will push it to the extra repo. Until then it will stay in AUR.
Cheers, Daniel
Next update to moonlight in ArchLinux: It will be moved to [community]. It has reached at the moment 31 votes and Timm Preetz (aka gummibaerchen) is taking care of it in the community repo. So, you will be able to do a "pacman -S moonlight" to install it, if you need it.
Cheers, Daniel
Since, I commented about this, I am now more eager to test this out, since it has hit 1.0 versions. So thanks for working on this Daniel.
arch-dev-public@lists.archlinux.org