Cuyahoga dropping Mono compatibility

This forum is only for questions or discussions about working with the mojoPortal source code in Visual Studio, obtaining the source code from the repository, developing custom features, etc. If your question is not along these lines this is not the right forum. Please try to post your question in the appropriate forum.

Please do not post questions about design, CSS, or skinning here. Use the Help With Skins Forum for those questions.

This forum is for discussing mojoPortal development

You can monitor commits to the repository from this page. We also recommend developers to subscribe to email notifications in the developer forum as occasionally important things are announced.

Before posting questions here you might want to review the developer documentation.

Do not post questions about design, CSS, or skinning here. Use the Help With Skins Forum for those questions.

This thread is closed to new posts. You must sign in to post in the forums.

5/29/2006 6:35:42 AM

Richard Bourque

Total Posts 92

View Posts

Cuyahoga dropping Mono compatibility

Well, I'm so glad I switched to mojoportal from cuyahoga now that they have announced that they have dropped Mono in favour of switching to .net 2.0. All my systems are Linux based and I have uptimes measured in years, and I really didn't want to install a Windows server just to run .net 2.0 and IIS with uptimes measured in weeks.

Joe! Stick with .net 1.1 so we can continue to use Mono. I don't mind waiting another year for Mono to be stable enought for .net 2.0!

5/29/2006 7:02:18 AM

Joe Audette

Total Posts 18439

View Posts

Re: Cuyahoga dropping Mono compatibility

Hi Richard,

I don't think they are dropping mono support, Martin emailed me last week asking my opinion on this. They are doing the same thing as me. They are keeping a version that works on mono but are moving forward with new development in 2.0 .NET. I think that is reasonable. It takes while to implement all the good 2.0 features so might as well get started, that way when mono 2.0 stack is ready they will be ready to take advantage of it with new features. If they wait and don't begin developing for 2.0 they will be behind when 2.0 mono is ready.

Also many parts of 2.0 mono do work and the only way to find the parts that don't work is to implement the features we want and then see what is broken on mono. That way we can report the bugs to the mono team and get the 2.0 mono stack working sooner. So waiting around is self defeating.

I will never drop mono support but I am only doing maintenance on the 1.x version of mojoPortal so mono users will have to wait for mono 2.0 support to get all the new features that are being developed, but when that happens they will get a lot of new features because I didn't wait to get started on it. There will be an upgrade path from the 1.x branch to the 2.x branch so ultimately no-one needs to be left behind.

Cheers,

Joe

5/29/2006 7:31:24 AM

Richard Bourque

Total Posts 92

View Posts

Re: Cuyahoga dropping Mono compatibility

Okay, thats good to hear. I was under the impression that they weren't maintaining the 1.1 code anymore and moving forward with 2.0. I misunderstood. I prefer 2.0 over 1.1 too, but can't justify the expense to upper management.

5/29/2006 10:07:48 AM

Martijn Boland

Total Posts 4

View Posts

Re: Cuyahoga dropping Mono compatibility

Hi Richard

I'd like to confirm what Joe mentions here. He really does a better job explaining it than I do. Must have something to do with the non-native English thingy :)

Martijn

You must sign in to post in the forums. This thread is closed to new posts.