[Mono-dev] Arguing for reconsideration of WONTFIX status of 425512
lucas at lucasmeijer.com
Thu Feb 12 12:40:00 EST 2009
> It seems to me that talking to upstream developers and get them to
> provide a more robust implementation from the get-go would be a much
> better outcome. Have them probe for .NET version, fall back to Mono
> and if none of those are available, gracefully degrade the functionality.
This should defenitely happen, and we're talking to the upstream
developers to deal with this situation in a better way.
The main theme of my message is not how to get these 3 projects from
running on mono, but if we can make the N others
that we do not know about run on mono as well.
I'm not advocating for _not_ implementing more proper behaviour upstream.
> I did not get the feeling (or maybe it is part of my lost email) that
> I have heard the "againsts" yet.
So far I think it can be summarized as:
1) It takes nonzero time, and there are a zillion more important things
2) It could break projects that are mono-only and rely on the same hack.
3) In the original comment on the bugzilla issue, it was noted that the
"field is shared with the runtime", and that
that would make a fix ugly.
I actually think #1 is a good argument against, #2 is not very likely,
but not totally impossible either, and to what extent #3 is a problem,
I don't know.
-- Game Development Blog: http://lucasmeijer.com/blog
More information about the Mono-devel-list