Talk:DotGNU

message: I've heard a lot about Mono, but didn't know of DotGNU before noticing that this Wikipedia article exists. The obvious question for me is: "Why does DotGNU exist? Why not just use Mono? If the projects have only slightly different goals, why not still use the same codebase with different options (similar to gcc "--pedantic" option, for instance)". I'm off to look for that info now, but perhaps this is a FAQ and should be explained in the article, or maybe I'm just ignorant as usual :-) 82.103.214.43 23:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why does DotGNU exist?

message: I've commented about the lack of real newbie help on the DotGNU homepage, due to the amount of material there on free software.  This is not some cheap shot at free software (which I actually applaud and support), it is a genuine concern that, on the DotGNU homepage, the developers are not making their software accessible to people.  It seems likely that most visitors: (a) will know that .NET is restrictive, and (b) will be looking for helpful information on how to use DotNET.  What they get is interesting, but not relevant to their needs.  I think this deserves comment on the Wikipedia page because it appears to reflect the way the DotGNU project works.
Someone deleted my original comments (they were a bit ironic I suppose) but I hope that my revised comments are more factual and helpful.  I really would like to see DotGNU move forward, and think a genuine roadblock is the lack of user support due to the extensive focus on free-ness —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.69.173.234 (talk) 09:05, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm concerned that DotGNU will not be useable in practice by not supporting the non CLS-standard bits, since real .NET applications will obviously use anything available in .NET. 193.74.100.50 (talk) 11:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Freeness and Usability

message: Has this project been abandoned? Should that be mentioned in the article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.226.24.45 (talk) 22:37, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was about to ask that same question. There seems to be at most 1 message per month on the mailing-lists, there's been no new releases in 3 years, no updates on their news page, etc.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.168.13 (talk) 13:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abandoned 

message: I hereby object to the proposed deletion of this article, in accordance with the proposed deletion policy. Squideshi (talk) 19:56, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on DotGNU. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100328171539/http://www.wedesoft.demon.co.uk/hornetseye-api/files/HornetsEye-txt.html to http://www.wedesoft.demon.co.uk/hornetseye-api/files/HornetsEye-txt.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:23, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello! Just typing in to ask about something, there is a claim here that says " The framework would be based on .NET Core, including the official runtime and standard libraries released under the MIT License and a patent grant explicitly protecting recipients from Microsoft-owned patents regarding .NET Core." 
I'd like to know. Where is this patent grant? I haven't seen any confirmation, be it by Microsoft or an employee of theirs about anything remotely like so. We do have the community promise (which, to my knowledge, is not a legally binding document) and we don't even know which patents does MS holds about this. I'd like to have the author who wrote this bit to explain their sources or verify this at all. TheRaveMaster (talk) 02:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  About "DotGNU and Microsoft's patents"