<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_24_1340218</id>
	<title>All GPLed Code Removed From MonoDevelop</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1261667820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>rysiek writes <i>"A few days ago, Miguel de Icaza wrote on his blog that the whole of <a href="http://monodevelop.com/">MonoDevelop</a> is now <a href="http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2009/Dec-15.html">'free' of GPL-licensed code</a>. 'MonoDevelop code is now LGPLv2 and MIT X11 licensed. We have removed all of the GPL code, allowing addins to use Apache, MS-PL code as well as allowing proprietary add-ins to be used with MonoDevelop (like RemObject's Oxygene).'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>rysiek writes " A few days ago , Miguel de Icaza wrote on his blog that the whole of MonoDevelop is now 'free ' of GPL-licensed code .
'MonoDevelop code is now LGPLv2 and MIT X11 licensed .
We have removed all of the GPL code , allowing addins to use Apache , MS-PL code as well as allowing proprietary add-ins to be used with MonoDevelop ( like RemObject 's Oxygene ) .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rysiek writes "A few days ago, Miguel de Icaza wrote on his blog that the whole of MonoDevelop is now 'free' of GPL-licensed code.
'MonoDevelop code is now LGPLv2 and MIT X11 licensed.
We have removed all of the GPL code, allowing addins to use Apache, MS-PL code as well as allowing proprietary add-ins to be used with MonoDevelop (like RemObject's Oxygene).
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545140</id>
	<title>Re:Richard Stallman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261678320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = I25UeVXrEHQ [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546392</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>onefriedrice</author>
	<datestamp>1261687260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can you even name any important GPL software (other than emacs)</p></div><p>As an aside, Vim beats emacs on the license front anyway.  In my book, charityware is considerably more endearing and noble than an All-Your-Source-Are-Belong-To-Us license.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you even name any important GPL software ( other than emacs ) As an aside , Vim beats emacs on the license front anyway .
In my book , charityware is considerably more endearing and noble than an All-Your-Source-Are-Belong-To-Us license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you even name any important GPL software (other than emacs)As an aside, Vim beats emacs on the license front anyway.
In my book, charityware is considerably more endearing and noble than an All-Your-Source-Are-Belong-To-Us license.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544498</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>fyrie</author>
	<datestamp>1261674420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Many popular iPhone games use Mono to some degree because of the Unity 3D engine. <a href="http://unity3d.com/company/news/unity-iphone-momentum-press.html" title="unity3d.com">http://unity3d.com/company/news/unity-iphone-momentum-press.html</a> [unity3d.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Many popular iPhone games use Mono to some degree because of the Unity 3D engine .
http : //unity3d.com/company/news/unity-iphone-momentum-press.html [ unity3d.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many popular iPhone games use Mono to some degree because of the Unity 3D engine.
http://unity3d.com/company/news/unity-iphone-momentum-press.html [unity3d.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547298</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>QuantumG</author>
	<datestamp>1261652700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>go fuck yourself miguel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>go fuck yourself miguel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>go fuck yourself miguel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546338</id>
	<title>Re:Eternal game of catch-up</title>
	<author>miguel</author>
	<datestamp>1261686960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As the other poster said, the fact that we do not have 1:1 parity has never been a problem.</p><p>Some other technologies that are subsets and are wildly successful:</p><p>* Android's Java is not a 1:1 mapping to Java either, and that has not prevented it from being successful.<br>* iPhoneOS is not MacOS 1:1, and yet, it is incredibly successful.<br>* Chrome the browser, does not have every feature of Firefox, that did not stop it either.<br>* JBoss is a subset of the full J2EE stack, and for years it has been wildly successful.<br>* Linux for years was not even POSIX compliant, and yet, many of us jumped on it, and it became wildly successful.</p><p>In Mono we implement what makes sense, and what people are actually using in day to day applications, we do this using metrics that we obtain from our Mono Migration Analysis that helps us identify which APIs are used, by how many applications and we have collected this data from some 10,000 applications:</p><p><a href="http://go-mono.com/momareports/" title="go-mono.com">http://go-mono.com/momareports/</a> [go-mono.com]</p><p>Call this the data-driven prioritization of development.</p><p>Mono was born as a technology to bring the best that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET had to offer to Linux, this was initially the c# language and the core libraries.   As time went by, Mono evolved in two directions:</p><p>(a) Organica growth: as the Mono community grew, we identify missing features, we envisioned better ways of doing something and created tools, APIs, languages and extensions that mattered to us.    In this category you can find things like Gtk#, Taglib#, Cairo#, Cecil, Mono.Options, Mono.Security, Mono.Data, Mono.Math, Mono.Management, Mono's C# REPL, Mono's SIMD extensions, Mono's large array support. Mono's dynamic JIT extensions, Mono's static compiler and much more.</p><p>For instance, today, more than 350 applications on the AppStore and 10 of the top 100 apps in there are built using Mono.</p><p>(b) Better compatibility with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET: this is a simpler process than coming up with our own APIs.   The<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET APIs are documented, there are thousands of applications to test the implementation against, the community is fed directly from the largest middleware stack in the world, so it made sense for us to implement these pieces.</p><p>Is it correct that we do not have a full implementation of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, there are a few reasons for this, now with numerals:</p><p>(i) Some APIs are Windows specific, and makes no sense to bring to Linux, in particular things like System.Management which is a thin wrapper around WMI.   Our advise: replace that code with Linux and MacOS specific code and use one or the other at runtime.</p><p>(ii) Some APIs are too larger for us to take with our current community.   This includes things like WPF and Workflow.   If someone steps up, we will embrace them, but until that happens, we are focused on improving the other areas that have more users and that we have more requests to implement.    Additionally, the WPF "lite" is a killer stack (also known as Silverlight).</p><p>(iii) Focus, we do not want to spread ourselves too thin.</p><p>As for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET 4.0: we are not too far from having the core be 4.0 compliant, it is a nice upgrade to the solid 3.5 release.   For instance, our C# compiler is already a full C# 4.0 compiler, and we already provide features that Microsoft wont offer until 5.0 (embeddable, reusable compiler, see C# REPL).</p><p>Moonlight is behind Silverlight, but I am not driven by despair, I am driven by the world of possibility.    If I were driven by despair, I would not have written a single line of code.</p><p>If Silverlight never succeeds, then who cares how behind Moonlight is.   But if Silverlight succeeds, and Linux users want to access that content, but the feature is either broken, not implemented or missing in Moonlight, those users will be in a position to contribute the code, and everyone wins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As the other poster said , the fact that we do not have 1 : 1 parity has never been a problem.Some other technologies that are subsets and are wildly successful : * Android 's Java is not a 1 : 1 mapping to Java either , and that has not prevented it from being successful .
* iPhoneOS is not MacOS 1 : 1 , and yet , it is incredibly successful .
* Chrome the browser , does not have every feature of Firefox , that did not stop it either .
* JBoss is a subset of the full J2EE stack , and for years it has been wildly successful .
* Linux for years was not even POSIX compliant , and yet , many of us jumped on it , and it became wildly successful.In Mono we implement what makes sense , and what people are actually using in day to day applications , we do this using metrics that we obtain from our Mono Migration Analysis that helps us identify which APIs are used , by how many applications and we have collected this data from some 10,000 applications : http : //go-mono.com/momareports/ [ go-mono.com ] Call this the data-driven prioritization of development.Mono was born as a technology to bring the best that .NET had to offer to Linux , this was initially the c # language and the core libraries .
As time went by , Mono evolved in two directions : ( a ) Organica growth : as the Mono community grew , we identify missing features , we envisioned better ways of doing something and created tools , APIs , languages and extensions that mattered to us .
In this category you can find things like Gtk # , Taglib # , Cairo # , Cecil , Mono.Options , Mono.Security , Mono.Data , Mono.Math , Mono.Management , Mono 's C # REPL , Mono 's SIMD extensions , Mono 's large array support .
Mono 's dynamic JIT extensions , Mono 's static compiler and much more.For instance , today , more than 350 applications on the AppStore and 10 of the top 100 apps in there are built using Mono .
( b ) Better compatibility with .NET : this is a simpler process than coming up with our own APIs .
The .NET APIs are documented , there are thousands of applications to test the implementation against , the community is fed directly from the largest middleware stack in the world , so it made sense for us to implement these pieces.Is it correct that we do not have a full implementation of .NET , there are a few reasons for this , now with numerals : ( i ) Some APIs are Windows specific , and makes no sense to bring to Linux , in particular things like System.Management which is a thin wrapper around WMI .
Our advise : replace that code with Linux and MacOS specific code and use one or the other at runtime .
( ii ) Some APIs are too larger for us to take with our current community .
This includes things like WPF and Workflow .
If someone steps up , we will embrace them , but until that happens , we are focused on improving the other areas that have more users and that we have more requests to implement .
Additionally , the WPF " lite " is a killer stack ( also known as Silverlight ) .
( iii ) Focus , we do not want to spread ourselves too thin.As for .NET 4.0 : we are not too far from having the core be 4.0 compliant , it is a nice upgrade to the solid 3.5 release .
For instance , our C # compiler is already a full C # 4.0 compiler , and we already provide features that Microsoft wont offer until 5.0 ( embeddable , reusable compiler , see C # REPL ) .Moonlight is behind Silverlight , but I am not driven by despair , I am driven by the world of possibility .
If I were driven by despair , I would not have written a single line of code.If Silverlight never succeeds , then who cares how behind Moonlight is .
But if Silverlight succeeds , and Linux users want to access that content , but the feature is either broken , not implemented or missing in Moonlight , those users will be in a position to contribute the code , and everyone wins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the other poster said, the fact that we do not have 1:1 parity has never been a problem.Some other technologies that are subsets and are wildly successful:* Android's Java is not a 1:1 mapping to Java either, and that has not prevented it from being successful.
* iPhoneOS is not MacOS 1:1, and yet, it is incredibly successful.
* Chrome the browser, does not have every feature of Firefox, that did not stop it either.
* JBoss is a subset of the full J2EE stack, and for years it has been wildly successful.
* Linux for years was not even POSIX compliant, and yet, many of us jumped on it, and it became wildly successful.In Mono we implement what makes sense, and what people are actually using in day to day applications, we do this using metrics that we obtain from our Mono Migration Analysis that helps us identify which APIs are used, by how many applications and we have collected this data from some 10,000 applications:http://go-mono.com/momareports/ [go-mono.com]Call this the data-driven prioritization of development.Mono was born as a technology to bring the best that .NET had to offer to Linux, this was initially the c# language and the core libraries.
As time went by, Mono evolved in two directions:(a) Organica growth: as the Mono community grew, we identify missing features, we envisioned better ways of doing something and created tools, APIs, languages and extensions that mattered to us.
In this category you can find things like Gtk#, Taglib#, Cairo#, Cecil, Mono.Options, Mono.Security, Mono.Data, Mono.Math, Mono.Management, Mono's C# REPL, Mono's SIMD extensions, Mono's large array support.
Mono's dynamic JIT extensions, Mono's static compiler and much more.For instance, today, more than 350 applications on the AppStore and 10 of the top 100 apps in there are built using Mono.
(b) Better compatibility with .NET: this is a simpler process than coming up with our own APIs.
The .NET APIs are documented, there are thousands of applications to test the implementation against, the community is fed directly from the largest middleware stack in the world, so it made sense for us to implement these pieces.Is it correct that we do not have a full implementation of .NET, there are a few reasons for this, now with numerals:(i) Some APIs are Windows specific, and makes no sense to bring to Linux, in particular things like System.Management which is a thin wrapper around WMI.
Our advise: replace that code with Linux and MacOS specific code and use one or the other at runtime.
(ii) Some APIs are too larger for us to take with our current community.
This includes things like WPF and Workflow.
If someone steps up, we will embrace them, but until that happens, we are focused on improving the other areas that have more users and that we have more requests to implement.
Additionally, the WPF "lite" is a killer stack (also known as Silverlight).
(iii) Focus, we do not want to spread ourselves too thin.As for .NET 4.0: we are not too far from having the core be 4.0 compliant, it is a nice upgrade to the solid 3.5 release.
For instance, our C# compiler is already a full C# 4.0 compiler, and we already provide features that Microsoft wont offer until 5.0 (embeddable, reusable compiler, see C# REPL).Moonlight is behind Silverlight, but I am not driven by despair, I am driven by the world of possibility.
If I were driven by despair, I would not have written a single line of code.If Silverlight never succeeds, then who cares how behind Moonlight is.
But if Silverlight succeeds, and Linux users want to access that content, but the feature is either broken, not implemented or missing in Moonlight, those users will be in a position to contribute the code, and everyone wins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547228</id>
	<title>Remove Tomboy (Miguelboy); install GNOTE</title>
	<author>Dystopian Rebel</author>
	<datestamp>1261652040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://live.gnome.org/Gnote" title="gnome.org">http://live.gnome.org/Gnote</a> [gnome.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //live.gnome.org/Gnote [ gnome.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://live.gnome.org/Gnote [gnome.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545230</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261678860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.Net sucks on it's own, not because Microsoft made it.  I think it's crap and I think Mono is just cross platform crap.  My list of languages that suck:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net|Mono<br>VisualBasic<br>Java<br>RubyonRails<br>All 'framework' languages that make it easy for people to crank out bloatware.</p><p>Last month I replaced 120MB of ruby dependencies with 14 bash scripts.  But it seems like every time I turn around someone is presenting me with a new sack full of ax handles and asking me to alter our filesystem to support it.  The current bane of my existence is an 'unsupported' gui<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net app that won't run in anything except 1.49-somethingsomething.</p><p>My opinion is that how easy it is to implement your ideas is the \_least\_ important consideration, but so many programmers seem to think it's the only one that matters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.Net sucks on it 's own , not because Microsoft made it .
I think it 's crap and I think Mono is just cross platform crap .
My list of languages that suck : .Net | MonoVisualBasicJavaRubyonRailsAll 'framework ' languages that make it easy for people to crank out bloatware.Last month I replaced 120MB of ruby dependencies with 14 bash scripts .
But it seems like every time I turn around someone is presenting me with a new sack full of ax handles and asking me to alter our filesystem to support it .
The current bane of my existence is an 'unsupported ' gui .net app that wo n't run in anything except 1.49-somethingsomething.My opinion is that how easy it is to implement your ideas is the \ _least \ _ important consideration , but so many programmers seem to think it 's the only one that matters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.Net sucks on it's own, not because Microsoft made it.
I think it's crap and I think Mono is just cross platform crap.
My list of languages that suck: .Net|MonoVisualBasicJavaRubyonRailsAll 'framework' languages that make it easy for people to crank out bloatware.Last month I replaced 120MB of ruby dependencies with 14 bash scripts.
But it seems like every time I turn around someone is presenting me with a new sack full of ax handles and asking me to alter our filesystem to support it.
The current bane of my existence is an 'unsupported' gui .net app that won't run in anything except 1.49-somethingsomething.My opinion is that how easy it is to implement your ideas is the \_least\_ important consideration, but so many programmers seem to think it's the only one that matters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544412</id>
	<title>Re:Sorry, Miguel</title>
	<author>rubycodez</author>
	<datestamp>1261673880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Miguel never sees Bill's wife being Bill's butt-lick.  Hopefully this crap gets thrown out of open source OS distributions, we don't need to be trying to play catch-up every time Microsoft developers have a brain fart</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Miguel never sees Bill 's wife being Bill 's butt-lick .
Hopefully this crap gets thrown out of open source OS distributions , we do n't need to be trying to play catch-up every time Microsoft developers have a brain fart</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Miguel never sees Bill's wife being Bill's butt-lick.
Hopefully this crap gets thrown out of open source OS distributions, we don't need to be trying to play catch-up every time Microsoft developers have a brain fart</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545160</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>canajin56</author>
	<datestamp>1261678440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Lazarus project handled (a) by saying "We view the GPL as only applying to plugins if they're installed, so you can write non-GPL plugins as long as you distribute them separately".  The FSF disagrees and probably wants to burn them at the stake, but without FSF code in Lazarus, all their screams are just empty threats and calls for boycotts, like that would convince those of us already crazy enough to be using object pascal.  And man, all the zealots screaming for your head, I sure hope they don't represent the GNU community as a whole.  Though from reading all the contempt and vitriol in the GNU FAQ, I have a sinking suspicion that they do, unfortunately.  I didn't know the GNU guys hated Apache and Mozilla and BSD so damn hard!  It seems just absurd to think that the FSF really thinks that, if you write a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.so against an MIT licensed API, you're still bound by the GPL, just because a GPL program loads libraries written against that API.  Total madness.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Lazarus project handled ( a ) by saying " We view the GPL as only applying to plugins if they 're installed , so you can write non-GPL plugins as long as you distribute them separately " .
The FSF disagrees and probably wants to burn them at the stake , but without FSF code in Lazarus , all their screams are just empty threats and calls for boycotts , like that would convince those of us already crazy enough to be using object pascal .
And man , all the zealots screaming for your head , I sure hope they do n't represent the GNU community as a whole .
Though from reading all the contempt and vitriol in the GNU FAQ , I have a sinking suspicion that they do , unfortunately .
I did n't know the GNU guys hated Apache and Mozilla and BSD so damn hard !
It seems just absurd to think that the FSF really thinks that , if you write a .so against an MIT licensed API , you 're still bound by the GPL , just because a GPL program loads libraries written against that API .
Total madness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Lazarus project handled (a) by saying "We view the GPL as only applying to plugins if they're installed, so you can write non-GPL plugins as long as you distribute them separately".
The FSF disagrees and probably wants to burn them at the stake, but without FSF code in Lazarus, all their screams are just empty threats and calls for boycotts, like that would convince those of us already crazy enough to be using object pascal.
And man, all the zealots screaming for your head, I sure hope they don't represent the GNU community as a whole.
Though from reading all the contempt and vitriol in the GNU FAQ, I have a sinking suspicion that they do, unfortunately.
I didn't know the GNU guys hated Apache and Mozilla and BSD so damn hard!
It seems just absurd to think that the FSF really thinks that, if you write a .so against an MIT licensed API, you're still bound by the GPL, just because a GPL program loads libraries written against that API.
Total madness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30565342</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>gatesvp</author>
	<datestamp>1261906860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes we have several installs at my office.</p><p>We run hundreds of Linux servers on EC2 and much of the original software was written in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET. Most of our commodity servers have therefore been ported to Mono. Several of our core servers are running Windows. So we end up using Mono when we need scale (to save on licenses) and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET on Windows for ease of implementation (like Services) on those servers that won't need to scale heavily.</p><p>At the end of the day our team uses both VS and MonoDevelop and I don't really think that either of them are going away<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes we have several installs at my office.We run hundreds of Linux servers on EC2 and much of the original software was written in .NET .
Most of our commodity servers have therefore been ported to Mono .
Several of our core servers are running Windows .
So we end up using Mono when we need scale ( to save on licenses ) and .NET on Windows for ease of implementation ( like Services ) on those servers that wo n't need to scale heavily.At the end of the day our team uses both VS and MonoDevelop and I do n't really think that either of them are going away : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes we have several installs at my office.We run hundreds of Linux servers on EC2 and much of the original software was written in .NET.
Most of our commodity servers have therefore been ported to Mono.
Several of our core servers are running Windows.
So we end up using Mono when we need scale (to save on licenses) and .NET on Windows for ease of implementation (like Services) on those servers that won't need to scale heavily.At the end of the day our team uses both VS and MonoDevelop and I don't really think that either of them are going away :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555816</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>PmaxII</author>
	<datestamp>1261843680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I uses Calc.exe... but I can only write funny words like : boobies...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I uses Calc.exe... but I can only write funny words like : boobies.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I uses Calc.exe... but I can only write funny words like : boobies...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546474</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>bcrowell</author>
	<datestamp>1261687860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Alas, Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution, just so they can have a note taking applet which takes 189MB memory (counting libraries used by it and no other process) and takes several seconds to start on beefy hardware while the C++ port of that very same code uses 5MB and starts near-instantly.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Hmm...I tried to verify the statement about the 189 MB and failed, but maybe I'm just using the wrong method. I did a free -m, loaded tomboy, and then did another free -m. The result was only a 10 MB change in the amount of free memory.
</p><p>
It's true that tomboy is slow-loading on my (relatively fast) hardware. It's also true that it uses quite a bit of disk space. I did
apt-get remove tomboy f-spot libmono* &amp;&amp; apt-get autoremove &amp;&amp; apt-get autoclean, and that freed up 64 Mb of disk space. If you're looking at, e.g., how much you can fit on a CD-based linux distro, 64 Mb is a heck of a lot to dedicate to something that's only needed for the sake of one applet.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Alas , Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution , just so they can have a note taking applet which takes 189MB memory ( counting libraries used by it and no other process ) and takes several seconds to start on beefy hardware while the C + + port of that very same code uses 5MB and starts near-instantly .
Hmm...I tried to verify the statement about the 189 MB and failed , but maybe I 'm just using the wrong method .
I did a free -m , loaded tomboy , and then did another free -m. The result was only a 10 MB change in the amount of free memory .
It 's true that tomboy is slow-loading on my ( relatively fast ) hardware .
It 's also true that it uses quite a bit of disk space .
I did apt-get remove tomboy f-spot libmono * &amp;&amp; apt-get autoremove &amp;&amp; apt-get autoclean , and that freed up 64 Mb of disk space .
If you 're looking at , e.g. , how much you can fit on a CD-based linux distro , 64 Mb is a heck of a lot to dedicate to something that 's only needed for the sake of one applet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alas, Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution, just so they can have a note taking applet which takes 189MB memory (counting libraries used by it and no other process) and takes several seconds to start on beefy hardware while the C++ port of that very same code uses 5MB and starts near-instantly.
Hmm...I tried to verify the statement about the 189 MB and failed, but maybe I'm just using the wrong method.
I did a free -m, loaded tomboy, and then did another free -m. The result was only a 10 MB change in the amount of free memory.
It's true that tomboy is slow-loading on my (relatively fast) hardware.
It's also true that it uses quite a bit of disk space.
I did
apt-get remove tomboy f-spot libmono* &amp;&amp; apt-get autoremove &amp;&amp; apt-get autoclean, and that freed up 64 Mb of disk space.
If you're looking at, e.g., how much you can fit on a CD-based linux distro, 64 Mb is a heck of a lot to dedicate to something that's only needed for the sake of one applet.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544322</id>
	<title>Re:A Prelude to Charges...</title>
	<author>greed</author>
	<datestamp>1261673220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The LGPL code that remains can't be closed.  But it still isn't the blanket get-out-of-open-source-free card that a lot of people think it is.</p><p>For example, libraries based on LGPL libraries remain LGPL and therefore open source.  (LGPL 2.1 #2.)</p><p>Applications must use a pluggable library system (such as shared objects with a dynamic or runtime linker), or provide re-linkable binaries, otherwise the application must be open source.  (LGPL 2.1 #6.  Failing to qualify for an exception means you go back to the other requirements in the license.)  BTW, C++ with templates makes qualifying under this section pretty much impossible, as the templates must appear as source in the translation unit that references them.  (Or your library only provides fully-instantiated templates of pre-defined types, which kind of defeats the point.)</p><p>Remember, the GNU licenses are about the end-user getting freedom to modify the code they receive, and not the developer/vendor having rights.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The LGPL code that remains ca n't be closed .
But it still is n't the blanket get-out-of-open-source-free card that a lot of people think it is.For example , libraries based on LGPL libraries remain LGPL and therefore open source .
( LGPL 2.1 # 2 .
) Applications must use a pluggable library system ( such as shared objects with a dynamic or runtime linker ) , or provide re-linkable binaries , otherwise the application must be open source .
( LGPL 2.1 # 6 .
Failing to qualify for an exception means you go back to the other requirements in the license .
) BTW , C + + with templates makes qualifying under this section pretty much impossible , as the templates must appear as source in the translation unit that references them .
( Or your library only provides fully-instantiated templates of pre-defined types , which kind of defeats the point .
) Remember , the GNU licenses are about the end-user getting freedom to modify the code they receive , and not the developer/vendor having rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The LGPL code that remains can't be closed.
But it still isn't the blanket get-out-of-open-source-free card that a lot of people think it is.For example, libraries based on LGPL libraries remain LGPL and therefore open source.
(LGPL 2.1 #2.
)Applications must use a pluggable library system (such as shared objects with a dynamic or runtime linker), or provide re-linkable binaries, otherwise the application must be open source.
(LGPL 2.1 #6.
Failing to qualify for an exception means you go back to the other requirements in the license.
)  BTW, C++ with templates makes qualifying under this section pretty much impossible, as the templates must appear as source in the translation unit that references them.
(Or your library only provides fully-instantiated templates of pre-defined types, which kind of defeats the point.
)Remember, the GNU licenses are about the end-user getting freedom to modify the code they receive, and not the developer/vendor having rights.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544652</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>krelian</author>
	<datestamp>1261675320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You'd be surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint, it's the silent Apache HTTPD killer</p></div><p>How does sharepoint compete with a web server? Isn't IIS the Microsoft competition to Apache?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd be surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint , it 's the silent Apache HTTPD killerHow does sharepoint compete with a web server ?
Is n't IIS the Microsoft competition to Apache ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd be surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint, it's the silent Apache HTTPD killerHow does sharepoint compete with a web server?
Isn't IIS the Microsoft competition to Apache?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546016</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261684020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who's whining? What are you talking about? Not the article. How is this rant even modded up?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who 's whining ?
What are you talking about ?
Not the article .
How is this rant even modded up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who's whining?
What are you talking about?
Not the article.
How is this rant even modded up?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150</id>
	<title>Mono Blows (hint, where's FW 3.5)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261672080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, if you are going to devote your life to making a C# clone on Linux, then at least quit screwing around with applications and focus on the language.  I mean, come on, where's WPF?  Where's WCF?  Where's LINQ to SQL?</p><p>Mono, you suck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , if you are going to devote your life to making a C # clone on Linux , then at least quit screwing around with applications and focus on the language .
I mean , come on , where 's WPF ?
Where 's WCF ?
Where 's LINQ to SQL ? Mono , you suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, if you are going to devote your life to making a C# clone on Linux, then at least quit screwing around with applications and focus on the language.
I mean, come on, where's WPF?
Where's WCF?
Where's LINQ to SQL?Mono, you suck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546506</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261688100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My list of languages that suck:<br>RubyonRails</p></div><p>Ruby on Rails (not "Rubyon Rails") isn't a language.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My list of languages that suck : RubyonRailsRuby on Rails ( not " Rubyon Rails " ) is n't a language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My list of languages that suck:RubyonRailsRuby on Rails (not "Rubyon Rails") isn't a language.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546422</id>
	<title>Re:I know it's now LGPL but I couldn't resist ...</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1261687440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"(I believe GCC was the last remaining bit)."</p><p>Nah, actually there's groff and a couple of other minor items(in freebsd that is). The other bsds are closer to freedom from the gpl but the compiler is the biggest snag in all of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ( I believe GCC was the last remaining bit ) .
" Nah , actually there 's groff and a couple of other minor items ( in freebsd that is ) .
The other bsds are closer to freedom from the gpl but the compiler is the biggest snag in all of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"(I believe GCC was the last remaining bit).
"Nah, actually there's groff and a couple of other minor items(in freebsd that is).
The other bsds are closer to freedom from the gpl but the compiler is the biggest snag in all of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544676</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261675440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MonoDevelop was designed to get Visual Studio Windows developers to use it to develop for Linux, Mac OS X, and other platforms that Mono exists for.</p><p>This is because high schools and colleges teach in C# and Visual BASIC instead of ANSI C++, Java, Python, and nedit with gcc and Makefiles. The programming students can keep their Visual Studio skills and still develop for Non-Windows platforms without having to learn new things very much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MonoDevelop was designed to get Visual Studio Windows developers to use it to develop for Linux , Mac OS X , and other platforms that Mono exists for.This is because high schools and colleges teach in C # and Visual BASIC instead of ANSI C + + , Java , Python , and nedit with gcc and Makefiles .
The programming students can keep their Visual Studio skills and still develop for Non-Windows platforms without having to learn new things very much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MonoDevelop was designed to get Visual Studio Windows developers to use it to develop for Linux, Mac OS X, and other platforms that Mono exists for.This is because high schools and colleges teach in C# and Visual BASIC instead of ANSI C++, Java, Python, and nedit with gcc and Makefiles.
The programming students can keep their Visual Studio skills and still develop for Non-Windows platforms without having to learn new things very much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</id>
	<title>A Prelude to Charges...</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1261672440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By removing GPL code, the Mono team has laid the groundwork for a closed source, commercial implementation.  You watch.  Mono is going to become a product, something that will be an instant-cripple for any Linux distribution that comes to rely on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By removing GPL code , the Mono team has laid the groundwork for a closed source , commercial implementation .
You watch .
Mono is going to become a product , something that will be an instant-cripple for any Linux distribution that comes to rely on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By removing GPL code, the Mono team has laid the groundwork for a closed source, commercial implementation.
You watch.
Mono is going to become a product, something that will be an instant-cripple for any Linux distribution that comes to rely on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198</id>
	<title>I think it's funny</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261672440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reading all of these comments and then seeing them modded as Troll or as Flamebait. When actually the comments are pretty much correct. Who really uses Mono? After all, isn't it loosely based on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET version 1.1 still? What's the point?</p><p>For Windows-based development you can fire up Visual Studio 2005 or 2008 Express edition without paying a dime and those are based on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET 2.0 or 3.x, correct?</p><p>Unless Mono has upped the ante and has actually moved beyond 2003-era frameworks I don't see its relevance...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading all of these comments and then seeing them modded as Troll or as Flamebait .
When actually the comments are pretty much correct .
Who really uses Mono ?
After all , is n't it loosely based on .NET version 1.1 still ?
What 's the point ? For Windows-based development you can fire up Visual Studio 2005 or 2008 Express edition without paying a dime and those are based on .NET 2.0 or 3.x , correct ? Unless Mono has upped the ante and has actually moved beyond 2003-era frameworks I do n't see its relevance.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading all of these comments and then seeing them modded as Troll or as Flamebait.
When actually the comments are pretty much correct.
Who really uses Mono?
After all, isn't it loosely based on .NET version 1.1 still?
What's the point?For Windows-based development you can fire up Visual Studio 2005 or 2008 Express edition without paying a dime and those are based on .NET 2.0 or 3.x, correct?Unless Mono has upped the ante and has actually moved beyond 2003-era frameworks I don't see its relevance...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544456</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261674120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, this.</p><p>LGPL is not "closed" - you still have to release the source code if you distribute software containing LGPL components.  But what version of the LGPL are we taking about here? Since it's very easy to combine or cripple the LGPL'd parts so that they either rely on propritary or patent encumbered components in a way that can't be acheived with a full GPL product.  Does the LGPL v3 protect against Tivoisation in the same manner intended by the GPL3? (Yes, I could go read the license but...it's long...and I'm tired..and others already have done so!).</p><p>By the way, I'm not commenting about the suitability or preference of a particular licence - I'd just like to know what the implications are in this case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , this.LGPL is not " closed " - you still have to release the source code if you distribute software containing LGPL components .
But what version of the LGPL are we taking about here ?
Since it 's very easy to combine or cripple the LGPL 'd parts so that they either rely on propritary or patent encumbered components in a way that ca n't be acheived with a full GPL product .
Does the LGPL v3 protect against Tivoisation in the same manner intended by the GPL3 ?
( Yes , I could go read the license but...it 's long...and I 'm tired..and others already have done so !
) .By the way , I 'm not commenting about the suitability or preference of a particular licence - I 'd just like to know what the implications are in this case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, this.LGPL is not "closed" - you still have to release the source code if you distribute software containing LGPL components.
But what version of the LGPL are we taking about here?
Since it's very easy to combine or cripple the LGPL'd parts so that they either rely on propritary or patent encumbered components in a way that can't be acheived with a full GPL product.
Does the LGPL v3 protect against Tivoisation in the same manner intended by the GPL3?
(Yes, I could go read the license but...it's long...and I'm tired..and others already have done so!
).By the way, I'm not commenting about the suitability or preference of a particular licence - I'd just like to know what the implications are in this case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545260</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261679100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People like you, allowed Nazi Germany to take place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People like you , allowed Nazi Germany to take place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People like you, allowed Nazi Germany to take place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544102</id>
	<title>Awesome.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261671720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GPL is a pain. I am in the midst of a code review to remove all GLPed code as well for that same reason. I should have realized going into my (open-source) project that GPL is one way of saying that the code is useless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GPL is a pain .
I am in the midst of a code review to remove all GLPed code as well for that same reason .
I should have realized going into my ( open-source ) project that GPL is one way of saying that the code is useless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GPL is a pain.
I am in the midst of a code review to remove all GLPed code as well for that same reason.
I should have realized going into my (open-source) project that GPL is one way of saying that the code is useless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551552</id>
	<title>Miguel DOES work for Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261765020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea the other day I saw this shit auto-load on a Linux box I was building and it really pissed me off.</p><p>Maybe I don't want anything written in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET or C# on my machine.  My question is why in the first place.  Like you said there are a lot of <strong>better</strong> languages for Linux/UNIIX world to write in.  Python, Pearl, Java, C, C+ the list goes on without including<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET and C#.</p><p>And here we go with the <strong>"Branding"</strong> ploy used by MS and others.  "Got to have TOMBOY!"  No you need a "note-taking applet" there are plenty of others written in other languages.  The one I use in KDE whatever it is called works great and I doubt it is written in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET.  Its like people think they need "Word" to write a letter.  No you need a Word Processing Application.  I don't <i>"need"</i> Banshee.  I need a Music Player and SongBird, XMMS, Amarok (others) all work just fine.</p><p>Some argue that so you can develop<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET Windows applications on Linux.  Why would anyone want to when Visual Studio (which doesn't run on Linux) really is the best tool to use for this.  Yes I have worked with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET code in the past but what I did was developed on a Windows box.  Kind of silly developing on a system not meant to run the code you are working.</p><p>Mono is nothing more than a crack to allow Microsoft a way to slip into the Linux/UNIX world.  Miguel and Mono is like one of the maggots a Bore Fly leaves under you skin.  Soon it will become infected and start to rot away from the inside.</p><p>I happily left Windows World a long time ago and have never looked back.  One reason was crappy insecure code and I don't want it now.  If some want Mono fine load it up but please don't be putting this shit on my Linux box by default.</p><p>Keep writing wicked fast C code or Python!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea the other day I saw this shit auto-load on a Linux box I was building and it really pissed me off.Maybe I do n't want anything written in .NET or C # on my machine .
My question is why in the first place .
Like you said there are a lot of better languages for Linux/UNIIX world to write in .
Python , Pearl , Java , C , C + the list goes on without including .NET and C # .And here we go with the " Branding " ploy used by MS and others .
" Got to have TOMBOY !
" No you need a " note-taking applet " there are plenty of others written in other languages .
The one I use in KDE whatever it is called works great and I doubt it is written in .NET .
Its like people think they need " Word " to write a letter .
No you need a Word Processing Application .
I do n't " need " Banshee .
I need a Music Player and SongBird , XMMS , Amarok ( others ) all work just fine.Some argue that so you can develop .NET Windows applications on Linux .
Why would anyone want to when Visual Studio ( which does n't run on Linux ) really is the best tool to use for this .
Yes I have worked with .NET code in the past but what I did was developed on a Windows box .
Kind of silly developing on a system not meant to run the code you are working.Mono is nothing more than a crack to allow Microsoft a way to slip into the Linux/UNIX world .
Miguel and Mono is like one of the maggots a Bore Fly leaves under you skin .
Soon it will become infected and start to rot away from the inside.I happily left Windows World a long time ago and have never looked back .
One reason was crappy insecure code and I do n't want it now .
If some want Mono fine load it up but please do n't be putting this shit on my Linux box by default.Keep writing wicked fast C code or Python !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea the other day I saw this shit auto-load on a Linux box I was building and it really pissed me off.Maybe I don't want anything written in .NET or C# on my machine.
My question is why in the first place.
Like you said there are a lot of better languages for Linux/UNIIX world to write in.
Python, Pearl, Java, C, C+ the list goes on without including .NET and C#.And here we go with the "Branding" ploy used by MS and others.
"Got to have TOMBOY!
"  No you need a "note-taking applet" there are plenty of others written in other languages.
The one I use in KDE whatever it is called works great and I doubt it is written in .NET.
Its like people think they need "Word" to write a letter.
No you need a Word Processing Application.
I don't "need" Banshee.
I need a Music Player and SongBird, XMMS, Amarok (others) all work just fine.Some argue that so you can develop .NET Windows applications on Linux.
Why would anyone want to when Visual Studio (which doesn't run on Linux) really is the best tool to use for this.
Yes I have worked with .NET code in the past but what I did was developed on a Windows box.
Kind of silly developing on a system not meant to run the code you are working.Mono is nothing more than a crack to allow Microsoft a way to slip into the Linux/UNIX world.
Miguel and Mono is like one of the maggots a Bore Fly leaves under you skin.
Soon it will become infected and start to rot away from the inside.I happily left Windows World a long time ago and have never looked back.
One reason was crappy insecure code and I don't want it now.
If some want Mono fine load it up but please don't be putting this shit on my Linux box by default.Keep writing wicked fast C code or Python!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545662</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1261681740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's true, but the reason that I noticed in the article was to allow for closed components to be included.  One doesn't need to close the main structure if all of the distributed components become closed.  (To be fair, this wasn't indicated as the reason.  I just don't trust Mono.  Or Miguel.  Or anything he says.  I neither use nor install Mono, so if you believe that you can give moderate trust to anything I say in it's favour.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's true , but the reason that I noticed in the article was to allow for closed components to be included .
One does n't need to close the main structure if all of the distributed components become closed .
( To be fair , this was n't indicated as the reason .
I just do n't trust Mono .
Or Miguel .
Or anything he says .
I neither use nor install Mono , so if you believe that you can give moderate trust to anything I say in it 's favour .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's true, but the reason that I noticed in the article was to allow for closed components to be included.
One doesn't need to close the main structure if all of the distributed components become closed.
(To be fair, this wasn't indicated as the reason.
I just don't trust Mono.
Or Miguel.
Or anything he says.
I neither use nor install Mono, so if you believe that you can give moderate trust to anything I say in it's favour.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544362</id>
	<title>Re:I think it's funny</title>
	<author>Josh04</author>
	<datestamp>1261673520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Reading all of these comments and then seeing them modded as Troll or as Flamebait. When actually the comments are pretty much correct. Who really uses Linux? After all, isn't it loosely based on MINIX version 1.1 still? What's the point?</p><p>For Unix-based development you can fire up vim or emacs without paying a dime and those are based on the Hurd, correct?</p><p>Unless Linux has upped the ante and has actually moved beyond 1991-era frameworks I don't see its relevance...</p></div><p>Ah, I see what you're saying!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading all of these comments and then seeing them modded as Troll or as Flamebait .
When actually the comments are pretty much correct .
Who really uses Linux ?
After all , is n't it loosely based on MINIX version 1.1 still ?
What 's the point ? For Unix-based development you can fire up vim or emacs without paying a dime and those are based on the Hurd , correct ? Unless Linux has upped the ante and has actually moved beyond 1991-era frameworks I do n't see its relevance...Ah , I see what you 're saying !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading all of these comments and then seeing them modded as Troll or as Flamebait.
When actually the comments are pretty much correct.
Who really uses Linux?
After all, isn't it loosely based on MINIX version 1.1 still?
What's the point?For Unix-based development you can fire up vim or emacs without paying a dime and those are based on the Hurd, correct?Unless Linux has upped the ante and has actually moved beyond 1991-era frameworks I don't see its relevance...Ah, I see what you're saying!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547332</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>Arker</author>
	<datestamp>1261652940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Open Office is NOT a text editor, nor does it contain one.  ^\_^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Open Office is NOT a text editor , nor does it contain one .
^ \ _ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Open Office is NOT a text editor, nor does it contain one.
^\_^</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544888</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>pak9rabid</author>
	<datestamp>1261676640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mod parent up...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent up.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent up...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547536</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1261654620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wake me up when you demonstrate it's not (I've issued this challenge many times, and no one's managed to achieve it).</p><p>Hint:  Patents are published 18 months after filing, and a patent must be filed on an invention within a year of publication, otherwise the inventor forfeits the right to patent the invention.  Furthermore, patents can only be submarined if the inventor forfeits the right to file the patent overseas, something I highly doubt MS is willing to do.  As such, if parts of Mono were covered by patent, we'd almost certainly know about it by now (certainly there are enough anti-Mono trolls that *someone* should've been able to come up with such a patent by now).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wake me up when you demonstrate it 's not ( I 've issued this challenge many times , and no one 's managed to achieve it ) .Hint : Patents are published 18 months after filing , and a patent must be filed on an invention within a year of publication , otherwise the inventor forfeits the right to patent the invention .
Furthermore , patents can only be submarined if the inventor forfeits the right to file the patent overseas , something I highly doubt MS is willing to do .
As such , if parts of Mono were covered by patent , we 'd almost certainly know about it by now ( certainly there are enough anti-Mono trolls that * someone * should 've been able to come up with such a patent by now ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wake me up when you demonstrate it's not (I've issued this challenge many times, and no one's managed to achieve it).Hint:  Patents are published 18 months after filing, and a patent must be filed on an invention within a year of publication, otherwise the inventor forfeits the right to patent the invention.
Furthermore, patents can only be submarined if the inventor forfeits the right to file the patent overseas, something I highly doubt MS is willing to do.
As such, if parts of Mono were covered by patent, we'd almost certainly know about it by now (certainly there are enough anti-Mono trolls that *someone* should've been able to come up with such a patent by now).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545778</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261682400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but does anyone use MonoDevelop?</p></div><p>It runs like crap.  Click in the wrong place and it crashes.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>and frankly if you're using Mono you're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a *nix dev anyway. Aren't you?</p></div><p>I want it to work.  Period.  I'm a computer guy, I don't define or limit myself to Microsoft, Linux, or embedded 68HC11A, I just want a managed language that works.  Shove your bigotry.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but does anyone use MonoDevelop ? It runs like crap .
Click in the wrong place and it crashes.and frankly if you 're using Mono you 're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a * nix dev anyway .
Are n't you ? I want it to work .
Period. I 'm a computer guy , I do n't define or limit myself to Microsoft , Linux , or embedded 68HC11A , I just want a managed language that works .
Shove your bigotry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but does anyone use MonoDevelop?It runs like crap.
Click in the wrong place and it crashes.and frankly if you're using Mono you're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a *nix dev anyway.
Aren't you?I want it to work.
Period.  I'm a computer guy, I don't define or limit myself to Microsoft, Linux, or embedded 68HC11A, I just want a managed language that works.
Shove your bigotry.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30553946</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261758000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree totally. Sharepoint is poison, it not only gets in the way of C# development  but it invents new and exciting ways for things to break.<br>Add to that snail like speed and that it gets in the way of efficient content management.<br>Finally sky high licensing make sure you have to be totally brain dead to take this route.</p><p>ShitPoint is the perfect example of why non IT educated people should not make technical IT decisions</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree totally .
Sharepoint is poison , it not only gets in the way of C # development but it invents new and exciting ways for things to break.Add to that snail like speed and that it gets in the way of efficient content management.Finally sky high licensing make sure you have to be totally brain dead to take this route.ShitPoint is the perfect example of why non IT educated people should not make technical IT decisions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree totally.
Sharepoint is poison, it not only gets in the way of C# development  but it invents new and exciting ways for things to break.Add to that snail like speed and that it gets in the way of efficient content management.Finally sky high licensing make sure you have to be totally brain dead to take this route.ShitPoint is the perfect example of why non IT educated people should not make technical IT decisions</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546534</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1261645200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The second reason is just a practical one. In the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET open source ecosystem there are plenty of libraries and tools available under the MS-PL, Old and New BSD and Apache 2 licenses and we want to be in a position to use those libraries without rewriting it. We already do, and it has saved us a lot of time.</p></div><p>They're both practical reasons. I admire your honesty in general, though. The whole point of the GPL is to be benevolently viral. But hey, LGPL is a hell of a lot better than closed source. Thanks for doing anything.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The second reason is just a practical one .
In the .NET open source ecosystem there are plenty of libraries and tools available under the MS-PL , Old and New BSD and Apache 2 licenses and we want to be in a position to use those libraries without rewriting it .
We already do , and it has saved us a lot of time.They 're both practical reasons .
I admire your honesty in general , though .
The whole point of the GPL is to be benevolently viral .
But hey , LGPL is a hell of a lot better than closed source .
Thanks for doing anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The second reason is just a practical one.
In the .NET open source ecosystem there are plenty of libraries and tools available under the MS-PL, Old and New BSD and Apache 2 licenses and we want to be in a position to use those libraries without rewriting it.
We already do, and it has saved us a lot of time.They're both practical reasons.
I admire your honesty in general, though.
The whole point of the GPL is to be benevolently viral.
But hey, LGPL is a hell of a lot better than closed source.
Thanks for doing anything.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544418</id>
	<title>Stinky Europeans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261673940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Europeans stink.  They stink stink stink.  Stinky stinky stink.  Smelly euro-trash Euros.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Europeans stink .
They stink stink stink .
Stinky stinky stink .
Smelly euro-trash Euros .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Europeans stink.
They stink stink stink.
Stinky stinky stink.
Smelly euro-trash Euros.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544620</id>
	<title>Re:Mono Blows (hint, where's FW 3.5)</title>
	<author>nstlgc</author>
	<datestamp>1261675200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WPF and WCF have nothing to do with the C# language. If you're going to make a snide remark, at least put some effort in it. As for L2S, I heard that's coming along pretty well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WPF and WCF have nothing to do with the C # language .
If you 're going to make a snide remark , at least put some effort in it .
As for L2S , I heard that 's coming along pretty well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WPF and WCF have nothing to do with the C# language.
If you're going to make a snide remark, at least put some effort in it.
As for L2S, I heard that's coming along pretty well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544294</id>
	<title>GPL is not "useless"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261673040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a software developer, if you want to showcase your intelligence then you release the code under a license that allows people to examine the code but not repackage and sell it (e.g., the GPL). If you want to commercialize your intelligence then you release your software under a commercial license. Anything in-between is a trade-off: free marketing for the bigger fish and  small bites for the rest. Managed code will always depend on the latest<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net/Mono update.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a software developer , if you want to showcase your intelligence then you release the code under a license that allows people to examine the code but not repackage and sell it ( e.g. , the GPL ) .
If you want to commercialize your intelligence then you release your software under a commercial license .
Anything in-between is a trade-off : free marketing for the bigger fish and small bites for the rest .
Managed code will always depend on the latest .Net/Mono update .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a software developer, if you want to showcase your intelligence then you release the code under a license that allows people to examine the code but not repackage and sell it (e.g., the GPL).
If you want to commercialize your intelligence then you release your software under a commercial license.
Anything in-between is a trade-off: free marketing for the bigger fish and  small bites for the rest.
Managed code will always depend on the latest .Net/Mono update.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545706</id>
	<title>Re:I think it's funny</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1261681980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I will plead ignorance but is their equivalent of version 3 stable or still experimental, in development, etc? That makes a huge difference to businesses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I will plead ignorance but is their equivalent of version 3 stable or still experimental , in development , etc ?
That makes a huge difference to businesses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will plead ignorance but is their equivalent of version 3 stable or still experimental, in development, etc?
That makes a huge difference to businesses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545670</id>
	<title>Re:This makes sense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261681800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The GPL is great for standalone applications but if you want to allow developers to make addons you really have to rethink it. Yes, it ensures that any addon made for the application will be free software however you have to consider the tradeoff; GPL it: everything is GLP'd, some companies/people won't develop or release addons;</p></div><p>Anybody who wants to write a non-free (as in speech) add-on for free (as in speech) software has failed to divine the reasoning for selecting the GNU GPL as the license for the original piece of software.</p><p>GPL software is shared in the community under terms that ensure equality for all end-users.<br>If somebody doesn't want to share, nobody is forcing them to do so.<br>However, we don't play this "I'll share but only under my terms" game; where said terms are slanted in favor of one party over another. (Usually slanted in favor of the person who wants to "share" with us.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The GPL is great for standalone applications but if you want to allow developers to make addons you really have to rethink it .
Yes , it ensures that any addon made for the application will be free software however you have to consider the tradeoff ; GPL it : everything is GLP 'd , some companies/people wo n't develop or release addons ; Anybody who wants to write a non-free ( as in speech ) add-on for free ( as in speech ) software has failed to divine the reasoning for selecting the GNU GPL as the license for the original piece of software.GPL software is shared in the community under terms that ensure equality for all end-users.If somebody does n't want to share , nobody is forcing them to do so.However , we do n't play this " I 'll share but only under my terms " game ; where said terms are slanted in favor of one party over another .
( Usually slanted in favor of the person who wants to " share " with us .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GPL is great for standalone applications but if you want to allow developers to make addons you really have to rethink it.
Yes, it ensures that any addon made for the application will be free software however you have to consider the tradeoff; GPL it: everything is GLP'd, some companies/people won't develop or release addons;Anybody who wants to write a non-free (as in speech) add-on for free (as in speech) software has failed to divine the reasoning for selecting the GNU GPL as the license for the original piece of software.GPL software is shared in the community under terms that ensure equality for all end-users.If somebody doesn't want to share, nobody is forcing them to do so.However, we don't play this "I'll share but only under my terms" game; where said terms are slanted in favor of one party over another.
(Usually slanted in favor of the person who wants to "share" with us.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544658</id>
	<title>Re:Now for business use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261675380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's funny: the business I work for LOVEs GPL stuff. However they <i>are</i> an ISP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's funny : the business I work for LOVEs GPL stuff .
However they are an ISP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's funny: the business I work for LOVEs GPL stuff.
However they are an ISP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</id>
	<title>Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>Nursie</author>
	<datestamp>1261671660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know I'm an old fashioned luddite (I code with nedit, gcc and Makefiles), but does anyone use MonoDevelop?</p><p>MS does free (but not open) versions of its dev tools already, and frankly if you're using Mono you're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a *nix dev anyway. Aren't you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know I 'm an old fashioned luddite ( I code with nedit , gcc and Makefiles ) , but does anyone use MonoDevelop ? MS does free ( but not open ) versions of its dev tools already , and frankly if you 're using Mono you 're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a * nix dev anyway .
Are n't you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know I'm an old fashioned luddite (I code with nedit, gcc and Makefiles), but does anyone use MonoDevelop?MS does free (but not open) versions of its dev tools already, and frankly if you're using Mono you're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a *nix dev anyway.
Aren't you?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546644</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>innocent\_white\_lamb</author>
	<datestamp>1261646280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>(I code with nedit, gcc and Makefiles), </i> <br>
&nbsp; <br>If you haven't already done so, do yourself a favour and check out <a href="http://www.geany.org/" title="geany.org" rel="nofollow">geany</a> [geany.org].<br>
&nbsp; <br>The majority of my programming is C with ncurses, and geany is just the ticket for that kind of thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( I code with nedit , gcc and Makefiles ) ,   If you have n't already done so , do yourself a favour and check out geany [ geany.org ] .
  The majority of my programming is C with ncurses , and geany is just the ticket for that kind of thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(I code with nedit, gcc and Makefiles),  
  If you haven't already done so, do yourself a favour and check out geany [geany.org].
  The majority of my programming is C with ncurses, and geany is just the ticket for that kind of thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545060</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1261677840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.</p></div><p>It is? You mean BIND? er... sendmail? Apache? Solaris? BSDs?</p><p>Maybe PHP then? Perl? Java?</p><p>Hmm...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>stop your whining corporate America and just be HAPPY most of us GPL authors don't organize and actually make you play by your own rules.</p></div><p>If "GPL authors" were to do so, then they would stop to be "GPL authors", wouldn't they?</p><p>Or do you mean enforcing the license? If so, then FSF does that already (and a good thing they do, too).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet was basically built on the GPL , and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.It is ?
You mean BIND ?
er... sendmail ?
Apache ? Solaris ?
BSDs ? Maybe PHP then ?
Perl ? Java ? Hmm...stop your whining corporate America and just be HAPPY most of us GPL authors do n't organize and actually make you play by your own rules.If " GPL authors " were to do so , then they would stop to be " GPL authors " , would n't they ? Or do you mean enforcing the license ?
If so , then FSF does that already ( and a good thing they do , too ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.It is?
You mean BIND?
er... sendmail?
Apache? Solaris?
BSDs?Maybe PHP then?
Perl? Java?Hmm...stop your whining corporate America and just be HAPPY most of us GPL authors don't organize and actually make you play by your own rules.If "GPL authors" were to do so, then they would stop to be "GPL authors", wouldn't they?Or do you mean enforcing the license?
If so, then FSF does that already (and a good thing they do, too).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544380</id>
	<title>Re:Now for business use</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1261673580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You mean the company you work for hates GPL.  The last 5 I worked for, that includes fortune 100 companies like AT&amp;T and Comcast, Loved the GPL and OSS.  You should find companies that are nor run by undereducated management that is afraid of the GPL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean the company you work for hates GPL .
The last 5 I worked for , that includes fortune 100 companies like AT&amp;T and Comcast , Loved the GPL and OSS .
You should find companies that are nor run by undereducated management that is afraid of the GPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean the company you work for hates GPL.
The last 5 I worked for, that includes fortune 100 companies like AT&amp;T and Comcast, Loved the GPL and OSS.
You should find companies that are nor run by undereducated management that is afraid of the GPL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545942</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>aztracker1</author>
	<datestamp>1261683480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do you consider the internet being built on GPL?  Apache isn't GPL licensed, neither is/was FreeBSD.  IIRC the vast majority of internet servers up until the later 90's was FreeBSD with Apache.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you consider the internet being built on GPL ?
Apache is n't GPL licensed , neither is/was FreeBSD .
IIRC the vast majority of internet servers up until the later 90 's was FreeBSD with Apache .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you consider the internet being built on GPL?
Apache isn't GPL licensed, neither is/was FreeBSD.
IIRC the vast majority of internet servers up until the later 90's was FreeBSD with Apache.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544168</id>
	<title>good start!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261672320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>maybe next they'll remove all the non-GPL code as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe next they 'll remove all the non-GPL code as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe next they'll remove all the non-GPL code as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544076</id>
	<title>I know it's now LGPL but I couldn't resist ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261671660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thus begins the Free-Free Software movement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thus begins the Free-Free Software movement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thus begins the Free-Free Software movement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544390</id>
	<title>sigh</title>
	<author>StripedCow</author>
	<datestamp>1261673640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wake me up when mono is ms-patent-free</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wake me up when mono is ms-patent-free</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wake me up when mono is ms-patent-free</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544836</id>
	<title>Re:I know it's now LGPL but I couldn't resist ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261676400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Thus begins the Free-Free Software movement.</p></div><p>Begins? BSD guys have been trying to get rid of all GPL (including LGPL) in the base distro for a looong time - hence the planned migration to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clang" title="wikipedia.org">Clang</a> [wikipedia.org] (I believe GCC was the last remaining bit).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thus begins the Free-Free Software movement.Begins ?
BSD guys have been trying to get rid of all GPL ( including LGPL ) in the base distro for a looong time - hence the planned migration to Clang [ wikipedia.org ] ( I believe GCC was the last remaining bit ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thus begins the Free-Free Software movement.Begins?
BSD guys have been trying to get rid of all GPL (including LGPL) in the base distro for a looong time - hence the planned migration to Clang [wikipedia.org] (I believe GCC was the last remaining bit).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545644</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261681620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do realize that most of the major components of the internet are not GPL, right?  The primary DNS implementation, BIND, uses the BSD license, as does DHCP.  Apache uses it's own license.  Perl is dual-licensed as GPL and Artistic License.  Python uses it's own license.  PHP uses it's own license.  Java is GPL now, but before 2006, it wasn't.</p><p>So please, enlighten me on how "The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL."  Unless you mean that most of it was compiled using GCC.</p><p>The GPL has it's place, to be sure.  It is a perfectly fine license for software that should be distributed for free.  For a business, using a license where someone can take your code and push you out of the market would be a foolhardy mistake.  Coding for "the greater good" is a noble endeavor, but it doesn't pay the bills.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realize that most of the major components of the internet are not GPL , right ?
The primary DNS implementation , BIND , uses the BSD license , as does DHCP .
Apache uses it 's own license .
Perl is dual-licensed as GPL and Artistic License .
Python uses it 's own license .
PHP uses it 's own license .
Java is GPL now , but before 2006 , it was n't.So please , enlighten me on how " The internet was basically built on the GPL , and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL .
" Unless you mean that most of it was compiled using GCC.The GPL has it 's place , to be sure .
It is a perfectly fine license for software that should be distributed for free .
For a business , using a license where someone can take your code and push you out of the market would be a foolhardy mistake .
Coding for " the greater good " is a noble endeavor , but it does n't pay the bills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realize that most of the major components of the internet are not GPL, right?
The primary DNS implementation, BIND, uses the BSD license, as does DHCP.
Apache uses it's own license.
Perl is dual-licensed as GPL and Artistic License.
Python uses it's own license.
PHP uses it's own license.
Java is GPL now, but before 2006, it wasn't.So please, enlighten me on how "The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.
"  Unless you mean that most of it was compiled using GCC.The GPL has it's place, to be sure.
It is a perfectly fine license for software that should be distributed for free.
For a business, using a license where someone can take your code and push you out of the market would be a foolhardy mistake.
Coding for "the greater good" is a noble endeavor, but it doesn't pay the bills.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549778</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>binarylarry</author>
	<datestamp>1261732620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, because the cure would probably be AIDS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because the cure would probably be AIDS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because the cure would probably be AIDS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</id>
	<title>Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsoft.</title>
	<author>kurt555gs</author>
	<datestamp>1261671660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No GPL? Actually is Mono really that important any more? Most new software development is going to be on iPhone BSD, Android, and Maemo Linux. Needing legacy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net is nothing anyone cares about.</p><p>I think this shows Miguell's true pawn colors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No GPL ?
Actually is Mono really that important any more ?
Most new software development is going to be on iPhone BSD , Android , and Maemo Linux .
Needing legacy .net is nothing anyone cares about.I think this shows Miguell 's true pawn colors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No GPL?
Actually is Mono really that important any more?
Most new software development is going to be on iPhone BSD, Android, and Maemo Linux.
Needing legacy .net is nothing anyone cares about.I think this shows Miguell's true pawn colors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555346</id>
	<title>Double edged sword</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1261835880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While it manages to create a 450+ comment fight on Slashdot between open source users/developers (that is what MS wants), it also validates that rms is not some tinfoil hat fanatic and "open source" and "free" (as in speech) are in fact, can be really different terms.</p><p>It may have given some wake up call to anti GPL camp showing what they are actually serving to.</p><p>That is some big IMHO btw.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While it manages to create a 450 + comment fight on Slashdot between open source users/developers ( that is what MS wants ) , it also validates that rms is not some tinfoil hat fanatic and " open source " and " free " ( as in speech ) are in fact , can be really different terms.It may have given some wake up call to anti GPL camp showing what they are actually serving to.That is some big IMHO btw .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it manages to create a 450+ comment fight on Slashdot between open source users/developers (that is what MS wants), it also validates that rms is not some tinfoil hat fanatic and "open source" and "free" (as in speech) are in fact, can be really different terms.It may have given some wake up call to anti GPL camp showing what they are actually serving to.That is some big IMHO btw.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545444</id>
	<title>No, just... no.</title>
	<author>HalAtWork</author>
	<datestamp>1261680300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The last thing we need is a new "platform", and targeting one platform exclusively is a bad idea.  You also don't need to use MonoDevelop to choose your own license.  This seems both superfluous and like a bad idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The last thing we need is a new " platform " , and targeting one platform exclusively is a bad idea .
You also do n't need to use MonoDevelop to choose your own license .
This seems both superfluous and like a bad idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last thing we need is a new "platform", and targeting one platform exclusively is a bad idea.
You also don't need to use MonoDevelop to choose your own license.
This seems both superfluous and like a bad idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547412</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1261653660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>and frankly if you're using Mono you're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a *nix dev anyway. Aren't you?</i></p><p>No.  Why?  Because Unix developers prefer primitive tools?</p><p>C#, as a language, is really very good, and combined with the plethora of libraries available (bindings for the entire Gnome stack, among other things), makes for a very rich software stack.  And MonoDevelop does an excellent job of integrating a visual forms designer (who, in their right mind, wants to build GUIs by hand these days?) with an intelligent editor (it's code completion isn't anywhere near as sophisticated as Intellisense, but close), providing a very neat package for throwing together full-blown Gnome desktop applications very quickly.</p><p>Of course, I wouldn't use that toolset for everything.  When I'm hacking code for my DS, or otherwise find myself writing C/C++ on the job, I use a big xterm with GNU Screen, vim (nedit?  *snicker*), and good ol make/gcc/etc.  But if I want to rapidly build a desktop application for Linux, Mono and MonoDevelop is definitely one of the options on the table.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and frankly if you 're using Mono you 're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a * nix dev anyway .
Are n't you ? No .
Why ? Because Unix developers prefer primitive tools ? C # , as a language , is really very good , and combined with the plethora of libraries available ( bindings for the entire Gnome stack , among other things ) , makes for a very rich software stack .
And MonoDevelop does an excellent job of integrating a visual forms designer ( who , in their right mind , wants to build GUIs by hand these days ?
) with an intelligent editor ( it 's code completion is n't anywhere near as sophisticated as Intellisense , but close ) , providing a very neat package for throwing together full-blown Gnome desktop applications very quickly.Of course , I would n't use that toolset for everything .
When I 'm hacking code for my DS , or otherwise find myself writing C/C + + on the job , I use a big xterm with GNU Screen , vim ( nedit ?
* snicker * ) , and good ol make/gcc/etc .
But if I want to rapidly build a desktop application for Linux , Mono and MonoDevelop is definitely one of the options on the table .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and frankly if you're using Mono you're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a *nix dev anyway.
Aren't you?No.
Why?  Because Unix developers prefer primitive tools?C#, as a language, is really very good, and combined with the plethora of libraries available (bindings for the entire Gnome stack, among other things), makes for a very rich software stack.
And MonoDevelop does an excellent job of integrating a visual forms designer (who, in their right mind, wants to build GUIs by hand these days?
) with an intelligent editor (it's code completion isn't anywhere near as sophisticated as Intellisense, but close), providing a very neat package for throwing together full-blown Gnome desktop applications very quickly.Of course, I wouldn't use that toolset for everything.
When I'm hacking code for my DS, or otherwise find myself writing C/C++ on the job, I use a big xterm with GNU Screen, vim (nedit?
*snicker*), and good ol make/gcc/etc.
But if I want to rapidly build a desktop application for Linux, Mono and MonoDevelop is definitely one of the options on the table.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545654</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1261681680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think the issue is the licence as such but the fact it revolves around a closed source company's language and a company that does not want Linux to succeed. Had it started at lgpl then it probably wouldn't have been an issue. But it appears like they're slowly closing it up because they started on gpl and went to lgpl. What's next after that? Should we care? Maybe not but then maybe we should as MS' philosophy is inherently different from the open source philosophy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think the issue is the licence as such but the fact it revolves around a closed source company 's language and a company that does not want Linux to succeed .
Had it started at lgpl then it probably would n't have been an issue .
But it appears like they 're slowly closing it up because they started on gpl and went to lgpl .
What 's next after that ?
Should we care ?
Maybe not but then maybe we should as MS ' philosophy is inherently different from the open source philosophy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think the issue is the licence as such but the fact it revolves around a closed source company's language and a company that does not want Linux to succeed.
Had it started at lgpl then it probably wouldn't have been an issue.
But it appears like they're slowly closing it up because they started on gpl and went to lgpl.
What's next after that?
Should we care?
Maybe not but then maybe we should as MS' philosophy is inherently different from the open source philosophy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</id>
	<title>Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>hackus</author>
	<datestamp>1261675800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know I get sort of sick of hearing about how the GPL should be more business friendly.</p><p>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.</p><p>Don't like what the GPL has done or has to offer?</p><p>Why don't you try and imagine a internet only built for the highest paid players for a moment?</p><p>Yeah I sort of though so, so stop your whining corporate America and just be HAPPY most of us GPL authors don't organize and actually make you play by your own rules.</p><p>For one thing, making you pay for all of our code you are secretly using for free.   Slightly hypocritical, yeah, but that is how business is.  It is only business if you can rip someone off in a "unresticted" manner.</p><p>That is completely OK.</p><p>I for one have had enough of the whining about the GPL and how restrictive it is.</p><p>It seems to me, its only restrictions is you can't rip people off.</p><p>-Hack</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know I get sort of sick of hearing about how the GPL should be more business friendly.The internet was basically built on the GPL , and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.Do n't like what the GPL has done or has to offer ? Why do n't you try and imagine a internet only built for the highest paid players for a moment ? Yeah I sort of though so , so stop your whining corporate America and just be HAPPY most of us GPL authors do n't organize and actually make you play by your own rules.For one thing , making you pay for all of our code you are secretly using for free .
Slightly hypocritical , yeah , but that is how business is .
It is only business if you can rip someone off in a " unresticted " manner.That is completely OK.I for one have had enough of the whining about the GPL and how restrictive it is.It seems to me , its only restrictions is you ca n't rip people off.-Hack</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know I get sort of sick of hearing about how the GPL should be more business friendly.The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.Don't like what the GPL has done or has to offer?Why don't you try and imagine a internet only built for the highest paid players for a moment?Yeah I sort of though so, so stop your whining corporate America and just be HAPPY most of us GPL authors don't organize and actually make you play by your own rules.For one thing, making you pay for all of our code you are secretly using for free.
Slightly hypocritical, yeah, but that is how business is.
It is only business if you can rip someone off in a "unresticted" manner.That is completely OK.I for one have had enough of the whining about the GPL and how restrictive it is.It seems to me, its only restrictions is you can't rip people off.-Hack</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544946</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261677120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's almost like using emacs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's almost like using emacs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's almost like using emacs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547258</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1261652400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quite a few top iPhone games are written using Mono.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quite a few top iPhone games are written using Mono .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quite a few top iPhone games are written using Mono.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545350</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>stickystyle</author>
	<datestamp>1261679700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.</p></div><p>eh?</p><ul><li>Apache; Apache license </li><li>BIND; BSD license </li><li>ISC dhcpd; ISC license </li><li>sendmail; sendmail open source license</li><li>TCP/IP; not sure, but definitly not GPL</li></ul></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet was basically built on the GPL , and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.eh ? Apache ; Apache license BIND ; BSD license ISC dhcpd ; ISC license sendmail ; sendmail open source licenseTCP/IP ; not sure , but definitly not GPL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.eh?Apache; Apache license BIND; BSD license ISC dhcpd; ISC license sendmail; sendmail open source licenseTCP/IP; not sure, but definitly not GPL
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546490</id>
	<title>Re:Eternal game of catch-up</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1261687980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Better to stick with Java which gains new features, to be generous, at a glacial pace. Right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Better to stick with Java which gains new features , to be generous , at a glacial pace .
Right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better to stick with Java which gains new features, to be generous, at a glacial pace.
Right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544750</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261675800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Work you do is great. It upsets me that people dislike your work since it is so closely linked to Microsoft. You are a Hero.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Work you do is great .
It upsets me that people dislike your work since it is so closely linked to Microsoft .
You are a Hero .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Work you do is great.
It upsets me that people dislike your work since it is so closely linked to Microsoft.
You are a Hero.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544262</id>
	<title>Richard Stallman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261672800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dear Santa, please mod this comment -1 Troll so it will say "Richard Stallman (Score:-1, Troll)" at the top.</p><p>Thank you, AC</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Santa , please mod this comment -1 Troll so it will say " Richard Stallman ( Score : -1 , Troll ) " at the top.Thank you , AC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Santa, please mod this comment -1 Troll so it will say "Richard Stallman (Score:-1, Troll)" at the top.Thank you, AC</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170</id>
	<title>Now for business use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261672320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Businesses really don't like the GPL. I'm not allowed to use any GPL stuff anywhere unless it absolutely, positively will never leave the intranet. However, many businesses love the LGPL. It doesn't restrict them. So, it still stays open source, and businesses will create plugins. I write open source software on my own time, so I appreciate open source, but if I was a manager, I wouldn't touch any of the GPLv2/3 programs/code ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Businesses really do n't like the GPL .
I 'm not allowed to use any GPL stuff anywhere unless it absolutely , positively will never leave the intranet .
However , many businesses love the LGPL .
It does n't restrict them .
So , it still stays open source , and businesses will create plugins .
I write open source software on my own time , so I appreciate open source , but if I was a manager , I would n't touch any of the GPLv2/3 programs/code ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Businesses really don't like the GPL.
I'm not allowed to use any GPL stuff anywhere unless it absolutely, positively will never leave the intranet.
However, many businesses love the LGPL.
It doesn't restrict them.
So, it still stays open source, and businesses will create plugins.
I write open source software on my own time, so I appreciate open source, but if I was a manager, I wouldn't touch any of the GPLv2/3 programs/code ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546974</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>tildebeast</author>
	<datestamp>1261649580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was forced to take a C# class for my masters I used monodevelop instead of the free products available from micro$Haft. This license failure is indicative of the coming failures in the open source community. If we don't embrace GPLv3 soon we will all be dead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was forced to take a C # class for my masters I used monodevelop instead of the free products available from micro $ Haft .
This license failure is indicative of the coming failures in the open source community .
If we do n't embrace GPLv3 soon we will all be dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was forced to take a C# class for my masters I used monodevelop instead of the free products available from micro$Haft.
This license failure is indicative of the coming failures in the open source community.
If we don't embrace GPLv3 soon we will all be dead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544788</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1261676100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, that's a pretty decent text editor. I prefer MS Paint.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , that 's a pretty decent text editor .
I prefer MS Paint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, that's a pretty decent text editor.
I prefer MS Paint.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546350</id>
	<title>It is so sad...</title>
	<author>dup\_account</author>
	<datestamp>1261687020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's sad that the headline here is about removing GPL code.  Got a grudge against it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's sad that the headline here is about removing GPL code .
Got a grudge against it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's sad that the headline here is about removing GPL code.
Got a grudge against it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547060</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>tobiasly</author>
	<datestamp>1261650600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I know I'm an old fashioned luddite (I code with nedit, gcc and Makefiles), but does anyone use MonoDevelop?</p></div><p>Why do you think it's under such active development? Open source projects that no one uses tend to die on the vine.</p><p>Personally, I am very impressed with the ASP.NET MVC framework and plan to write several new websites using it and deploy them on Linux boxes running Apache and mod\_mono. I'm still using VS 2008 (running inside VirtualBox) at the moment but now that MonoDevelop is becoming more full-featured I hope to switch over completely soon.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know I 'm an old fashioned luddite ( I code with nedit , gcc and Makefiles ) , but does anyone use MonoDevelop ? Why do you think it 's under such active development ?
Open source projects that no one uses tend to die on the vine.Personally , I am very impressed with the ASP.NET MVC framework and plan to write several new websites using it and deploy them on Linux boxes running Apache and mod \ _mono .
I 'm still using VS 2008 ( running inside VirtualBox ) at the moment but now that MonoDevelop is becoming more full-featured I hope to switch over completely soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know I'm an old fashioned luddite (I code with nedit, gcc and Makefiles), but does anyone use MonoDevelop?Why do you think it's under such active development?
Open source projects that no one uses tend to die on the vine.Personally, I am very impressed with the ASP.NET MVC framework and plan to write several new websites using it and deploy them on Linux boxes running Apache and mod\_mono.
I'm still using VS 2008 (running inside VirtualBox) at the moment but now that MonoDevelop is becoming more full-featured I hope to switch over completely soon.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30556142</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261846560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use MonoDevelop for the mac to develop for the iPhone. Its a very good experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use MonoDevelop for the mac to develop for the iPhone .
Its a very good experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use MonoDevelop for the mac to develop for the iPhone.
Its a very good experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544976</id>
	<title>Re:Mono Blows (hint, where's FW 3.5)</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1261677360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't really blame them for not doing WPF, at least, as it's a huge beast. If you read some MSDN blogs, you know that it was talked about in public as early as 2003, and that means that it was being developed for much longer than that. It's both a fairly complicated API, and a very demanding on implementation to get performance right - heck, the original WPF release had a lot of perf troubles, and even today there's still a lot of stuff that only WPF 4 will iron out).</p><p>In any case, Gtk# is actually rather neat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't really blame them for not doing WPF , at least , as it 's a huge beast .
If you read some MSDN blogs , you know that it was talked about in public as early as 2003 , and that means that it was being developed for much longer than that .
It 's both a fairly complicated API , and a very demanding on implementation to get performance right - heck , the original WPF release had a lot of perf troubles , and even today there 's still a lot of stuff that only WPF 4 will iron out ) .In any case , Gtk # is actually rather neat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't really blame them for not doing WPF, at least, as it's a huge beast.
If you read some MSDN blogs, you know that it was talked about in public as early as 2003, and that means that it was being developed for much longer than that.
It's both a fairly complicated API, and a very demanding on implementation to get performance right - heck, the original WPF release had a lot of perf troubles, and even today there's still a lot of stuff that only WPF 4 will iron out).In any case, Gtk# is actually rather neat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545914</id>
	<title>If this is a problem for you, read the LGPL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261683240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quote the LGPL:</p><blockquote><div><p>3. You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General Public<br>License instead of this License to a given copy of the Library.  To do<br>this, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, so<br>that they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, version 2,<br>instead of to this License.  (If a newer version than version 2 of the<br>ordinary GNU General Public License has appeared, then you can specify<br>that version instead if you wish.)  Do not make any other change in<br>these notices.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Once this change is made in a given copy, it is irreversible for<br>that copy, so the ordinary GNU General Public License applies to all<br>subsequent copies and derivative works made from that copy.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; This option is useful when you wish to copy part of the code of<br>the Library into a program that is not a library.</p></div></blockquote><p>So here's your solution if this bothers you - fork Mono and apply the GPL or shut the fuck up about the license.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quote the LGPL : 3 .
You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General PublicLicense instead of this License to a given copy of the Library .
To dothis , you must alter all the notices that refer to this License , sothat they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License , version 2,instead of to this License .
( If a newer version than version 2 of theordinary GNU General Public License has appeared , then you can specifythat version instead if you wish .
) Do not make any other change inthese notices .
    Once this change is made in a given copy , it is irreversible forthat copy , so the ordinary GNU General Public License applies to allsubsequent copies and derivative works made from that copy .
    This option is useful when you wish to copy part of the code ofthe Library into a program that is not a library.So here 's your solution if this bothers you - fork Mono and apply the GPL or shut the fuck up about the license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quote the LGPL:3.
You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General PublicLicense instead of this License to a given copy of the Library.
To dothis, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, sothat they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, version 2,instead of to this License.
(If a newer version than version 2 of theordinary GNU General Public License has appeared, then you can specifythat version instead if you wish.
)  Do not make any other change inthese notices.
    Once this change is made in a given copy, it is irreversible forthat copy, so the ordinary GNU General Public License applies to allsubsequent copies and derivative works made from that copy.
    This option is useful when you wish to copy part of the code ofthe Library into a program that is not a library.So here's your solution if this bothers you - fork Mono and apply the GPL or shut the fuck up about the license.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545418</id>
	<title>Re:Sorry, Miguel</title>
	<author>gbarules2999</author>
	<datestamp>1261680120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about Ballmer? I hear he's single.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about Ballmer ?
I hear he 's single .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about Ballmer?
I hear he's single.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545210</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1261678740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I am surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint, yet its such a pile of w*** almost *everyone* at our corp thinks its pants (there are a few corporate yes-men lackeys who 'think' its good). Nobody can find anything on it, even adding search simply means we get thousands of hits for simple terms.</p><p>I can't understand why its spreading like an unfortunate rash at a sex party. Maybe the bosses will realise how bad it is and can it after it stops being used for a few months, but its always hanging in there, someone will post a document to it and suddenly its back to being a essential tool in everyday use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I am surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint , yet its such a pile of w * * * almost * everyone * at our corp thinks its pants ( there are a few corporate yes-men lackeys who 'think ' its good ) .
Nobody can find anything on it , even adding search simply means we get thousands of hits for simple terms.I ca n't understand why its spreading like an unfortunate rash at a sex party .
Maybe the bosses will realise how bad it is and can it after it stops being used for a few months , but its always hanging in there , someone will post a document to it and suddenly its back to being a essential tool in everyday use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I am surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint, yet its such a pile of w*** almost *everyone* at our corp thinks its pants (there are a few corporate yes-men lackeys who 'think' its good).
Nobody can find anything on it, even adding search simply means we get thousands of hits for simple terms.I can't understand why its spreading like an unfortunate rash at a sex party.
Maybe the bosses will realise how bad it is and can it after it stops being used for a few months, but its always hanging in there, someone will post a document to it and suddenly its back to being a essential tool in everyday use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544476</id>
	<title>Define "use"</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1261674300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm not allowed to use any GPL stuff anywhere unless it absolutely, positively will never leave the intranet.</p> </div><p>If you run a publicly accessible web site on a LAMP server, the only GPL programs involved are Linux and MySQL, and no copy of Linux or MySQL leaves your server. If you run a web site, only two kinds of programs are ever "distributed" (GPLv2) or "conveyed" (GPLv3) to the public: 1. in-page scripts written in JavaScript, ActionScript, or Java, and 2. software packages explicitly offered for download.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not allowed to use any GPL stuff anywhere unless it absolutely , positively will never leave the intranet .
If you run a publicly accessible web site on a LAMP server , the only GPL programs involved are Linux and MySQL , and no copy of Linux or MySQL leaves your server .
If you run a web site , only two kinds of programs are ever " distributed " ( GPLv2 ) or " conveyed " ( GPLv3 ) to the public : 1. in-page scripts written in JavaScript , ActionScript , or Java , and 2. software packages explicitly offered for download .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not allowed to use any GPL stuff anywhere unless it absolutely, positively will never leave the intranet.
If you run a publicly accessible web site on a LAMP server, the only GPL programs involved are Linux and MySQL, and no copy of Linux or MySQL leaves your server.
If you run a web site, only two kinds of programs are ever "distributed" (GPLv2) or "conveyed" (GPLv3) to the public: 1. in-page scripts written in JavaScript, ActionScript, or Java, and 2. software packages explicitly offered for download.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545052</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261677780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The GPL was first written in 1989.  The precursor to GPL was first used between 1985 and 1987 for GNU Emacs, Debugger, and Compiler Collection.  ARPANET predates that by more than a decade.  Perhaps the same movement and/or people were involved, but the Internet was not built on the GPL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The GPL was first written in 1989 .
The precursor to GPL was first used between 1985 and 1987 for GNU Emacs , Debugger , and Compiler Collection .
ARPANET predates that by more than a decade .
Perhaps the same movement and/or people were involved , but the Internet was not built on the GPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GPL was first written in 1989.
The precursor to GPL was first used between 1985 and 1987 for GNU Emacs, Debugger, and Compiler Collection.
ARPANET predates that by more than a decade.
Perhaps the same movement and/or people were involved, but the Internet was not built on the GPL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546238</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>Dzonatas</author>
	<datestamp>1261685880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Does this sign the closing of the Mono project?</p><p>No. It's means that instead of once where you had to buy a special license to embed the Mono compiler, you now only need to use the LGPL rights to link to it.</p><p>If you are not interested into embedded Mono/.Net platform, then you are probably are not interested in this change.</p><p>For businesses like Second Life that use an embedded Mono system to compile their server-side scripts for their simulators, it is a big thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Does this sign the closing of the Mono project ? No .
It 's means that instead of once where you had to buy a special license to embed the Mono compiler , you now only need to use the LGPL rights to link to it.If you are not interested into embedded Mono/.Net platform , then you are probably are not interested in this change.For businesses like Second Life that use an embedded Mono system to compile their server-side scripts for their simulators , it is a big thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Does this sign the closing of the Mono project?No.
It's means that instead of once where you had to buy a special license to embed the Mono compiler, you now only need to use the LGPL rights to link to it.If you are not interested into embedded Mono/.Net platform, then you are probably are not interested in this change.For businesses like Second Life that use an embedded Mono system to compile their server-side scripts for their simulators, it is a big thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548470</id>
	<title>Mono is still dead, Jim</title>
	<author>broward</author>
	<datestamp>1261665300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mono is still dead, just as I predicted in 2006 and re-iterated in 2009.</p><p><a href="http://realmeme.com/roller/page/realmeme/?entry=he\_s\_still\_dead\_jim" title="realmeme.com">http://realmeme.com/roller/page/realmeme/?entry=he\_s\_still\_dead\_jim</a> [realmeme.com]</p><p>Dead.<br>DOA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mono is still dead , just as I predicted in 2006 and re-iterated in 2009.http : //realmeme.com/roller/page/realmeme/ ? entry = he \ _s \ _still \ _dead \ _jim [ realmeme.com ] Dead.DOA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mono is still dead, just as I predicted in 2006 and re-iterated in 2009.http://realmeme.com/roller/page/realmeme/?entry=he\_s\_still\_dead\_jim [realmeme.com]Dead.DOA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545234</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261678860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, if you want to be picky about it then I would say the internet was built on a combination of the BSD, MIT and Apache licenses. The GPL is just the cream that floats to the top.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , if you want to be picky about it then I would say the internet was built on a combination of the BSD , MIT and Apache licenses .
The GPL is just the cream that floats to the top .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, if you want to be picky about it then I would say the internet was built on a combination of the BSD, MIT and Apache licenses.
The GPL is just the cream that floats to the top.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>KiloByte</author>
	<datestamp>1261676160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Alas, Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution, just so they can have a note taking applet which takes 189MB memory (counting libraries used by it and no other process) and takes several seconds to start on beefy hardware while the C++ port of that very same code uses 5MB and starts near-instantly.</p><p>Even worse, there are folks pushing Banshee as the default music player so there's another dependency on Mono.</p><p>The sooner we get rid of Mono installed by default, the safer we'll be from this trap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alas , Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution , just so they can have a note taking applet which takes 189MB memory ( counting libraries used by it and no other process ) and takes several seconds to start on beefy hardware while the C + + port of that very same code uses 5MB and starts near-instantly.Even worse , there are folks pushing Banshee as the default music player so there 's another dependency on Mono.The sooner we get rid of Mono installed by default , the safer we 'll be from this trap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alas, Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution, just so they can have a note taking applet which takes 189MB memory (counting libraries used by it and no other process) and takes several seconds to start on beefy hardware while the C++ port of that very same code uses 5MB and starts near-instantly.Even worse, there are folks pushing Banshee as the default music player so there's another dependency on Mono.The sooner we get rid of Mono installed by default, the safer we'll be from this trap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546738</id>
	<title>Great!</title>
	<author>Improv</author>
	<datestamp>1261647360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would love to see Miguel and Mono taken as distant from the GNU projects as possible. Next step is for us to contain and eventually cure instances of Mono in the wild.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would love to see Miguel and Mono taken as distant from the GNU projects as possible .
Next step is for us to contain and eventually cure instances of Mono in the wild .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would love to see Miguel and Mono taken as distant from the GNU projects as possible.
Next step is for us to contain and eventually cure instances of Mono in the wild.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544400</id>
	<title>So was Tiger....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261673760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bah, married...</p><p>Miguel doesnt mind being road beef for when Bill is on the tour with Monsanto.</p><p>You dont understand anyways: Miguel loves him. Really, really, really loves him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah , married...Miguel doesnt mind being road beef for when Bill is on the tour with Monsanto.You dont understand anyways : Miguel loves him .
Really , really , really loves him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah, married...Miguel doesnt mind being road beef for when Bill is on the tour with Monsanto.You dont understand anyways: Miguel loves him.
Really, really, really loves him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544790</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>srh2o</author>
	<datestamp>1261676100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I keep hearing these kind of arguments but reality shows us that contrary to these claims that use of GPL code is growing.

The fact is that companies are used to licensing code and complying with the GPL is trivial compared with many of the other licensing steps that the average company has to comply with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I keep hearing these kind of arguments but reality shows us that contrary to these claims that use of GPL code is growing .
The fact is that companies are used to licensing code and complying with the GPL is trivial compared with many of the other licensing steps that the average company has to comply with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I keep hearing these kind of arguments but reality shows us that contrary to these claims that use of GPL code is growing.
The fact is that companies are used to licensing code and complying with the GPL is trivial compared with many of the other licensing steps that the average company has to comply with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547940</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1261658160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really. I'm a Linux guy who's trying to figure out how to write code that will be able to run on a number of platforms without too much platform-specific rewrite. I also think a GUI should be made in the same way it's used (IE with a mouse), so...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really .
I 'm a Linux guy who 's trying to figure out how to write code that will be able to run on a number of platforms without too much platform-specific rewrite .
I also think a GUI should be made in the same way it 's used ( IE with a mouse ) , so.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really.
I'm a Linux guy who's trying to figure out how to write code that will be able to run on a number of platforms without too much platform-specific rewrite.
I also think a GUI should be made in the same way it's used (IE with a mouse), so...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544310</id>
	<title>Sorry, Miguel</title>
	<author>seebs</author>
	<datestamp>1261673160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bill's still happily married.  I really don't think this is working.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bill 's still happily married .
I really do n't think this is working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bill's still happily married.
I really don't think this is working.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544564</id>
	<title>Re:Now for business use</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1261674900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If using GPL software is so dangerous for business, why are so many companies running Linux in production environments?  These are some of the most successful companies in the world, and they have been using Linux for a while -- where are the problems that you seem so sure would ensue from such a situation?  If you remain close minded about the GPL, you will be missing out on a lot of high quality software...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If using GPL software is so dangerous for business , why are so many companies running Linux in production environments ?
These are some of the most successful companies in the world , and they have been using Linux for a while -- where are the problems that you seem so sure would ensue from such a situation ?
If you remain close minded about the GPL , you will be missing out on a lot of high quality software.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If using GPL software is so dangerous for business, why are so many companies running Linux in production environments?
These are some of the most successful companies in the world, and they have been using Linux for a while -- where are the problems that you seem so sure would ensue from such a situation?
If you remain close minded about the GPL, you will be missing out on a lot of high quality software...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30554252</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>uninformedLuddite</author>
	<datestamp>1261764960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are amateurs. I use Havok</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are amateurs .
I use Havok</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are amateurs.
I use Havok</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544550</id>
	<title>Am I confused about the GPL?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261674720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From what I understand the GPL is simply a license for those that choose to use it (in particular have and/or examine the source code of a particular product).  Is there any reason why the copyright holder can't negotiate a seperate license with a private company that would not bind them to all the restrictions of the GPL?</p><p>I'm confused by the idea that a license would restrict the issuer, as I was under the impression that it was about defining terms to the issuee.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I understand the GPL is simply a license for those that choose to use it ( in particular have and/or examine the source code of a particular product ) .
Is there any reason why the copyright holder ca n't negotiate a seperate license with a private company that would not bind them to all the restrictions of the GPL ? I 'm confused by the idea that a license would restrict the issuer , as I was under the impression that it was about defining terms to the issuee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I understand the GPL is simply a license for those that choose to use it (in particular have and/or examine the source code of a particular product).
Is there any reason why the copyright holder can't negotiate a seperate license with a private company that would not bind them to all the restrictions of the GPL?I'm confused by the idea that a license would restrict the issuer, as I was under the impression that it was about defining terms to the issuee.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545802</id>
	<title>Re:Eternal game of catch-up</title>
	<author>aztracker1</author>
	<datestamp>1261682520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The fact that it is behind the MS implementation doesn't make it less of a platform to develop Linux apps on.  If I write an app that runs under Linux with Mono today, all the MS changes in the world won't change that.  As to Moonlight, I would agree there to an extent, since many doing Silverlight development give no regard to Moonlight compatability, and the streaming libraries from MS for Moonlight's use don't include the DRM necessary to work on most actual sites.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that it is behind the MS implementation does n't make it less of a platform to develop Linux apps on .
If I write an app that runs under Linux with Mono today , all the MS changes in the world wo n't change that .
As to Moonlight , I would agree there to an extent , since many doing Silverlight development give no regard to Moonlight compatability , and the streaming libraries from MS for Moonlight 's use do n't include the DRM necessary to work on most actual sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that it is behind the MS implementation doesn't make it less of a platform to develop Linux apps on.
If I write an app that runs under Linux with Mono today, all the MS changes in the world won't change that.
As to Moonlight, I would agree there to an extent, since many doing Silverlight development give no regard to Moonlight compatability, and the streaming libraries from MS for Moonlight's use don't include the DRM necessary to work on most actual sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</id>
	<title>Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261674960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We removed the GPL code in MonoDevelop for a couple of reasons:</p><p>(a) to allow it to become a platform that third-party plugin and add-in developers can target.<br>(b) to allow us to consume open source code that would otherwise conflict with the GPL (MS-PL licensed code, Apache licensed code, and original BSD licensed code).</p><p>Notice that (a) is the norm for Eclipse and Visual Studio, and that the ecosystem of third party plugins relies on this, both Eclipse and Visual Studio would be severely limited if they limited the plugins to be all GPL licensed.   As I explained on the blog post, there are current users that need to run their non-GPL code inside the IDE.</p><p>We want more third party developers to target MonoDevelop, and we want these third parties to consider MonoDevelop a platform that they can target without forcing a license on them.   Similar to how the Linux operating system can run code licensed under any license.</p><p>The second reason is just a practical one.   In the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET open source ecosystem there are plenty of libraries and tools available under the MS-PL, Old and New BSD and Apache 2 licenses and we want to be in a position to use those libraries without rewriting it.   We already do, and it has saved us a lot of time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We removed the GPL code in MonoDevelop for a couple of reasons : ( a ) to allow it to become a platform that third-party plugin and add-in developers can target .
( b ) to allow us to consume open source code that would otherwise conflict with the GPL ( MS-PL licensed code , Apache licensed code , and original BSD licensed code ) .Notice that ( a ) is the norm for Eclipse and Visual Studio , and that the ecosystem of third party plugins relies on this , both Eclipse and Visual Studio would be severely limited if they limited the plugins to be all GPL licensed .
As I explained on the blog post , there are current users that need to run their non-GPL code inside the IDE.We want more third party developers to target MonoDevelop , and we want these third parties to consider MonoDevelop a platform that they can target without forcing a license on them .
Similar to how the Linux operating system can run code licensed under any license.The second reason is just a practical one .
In the .NET open source ecosystem there are plenty of libraries and tools available under the MS-PL , Old and New BSD and Apache 2 licenses and we want to be in a position to use those libraries without rewriting it .
We already do , and it has saved us a lot of time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We removed the GPL code in MonoDevelop for a couple of reasons:(a) to allow it to become a platform that third-party plugin and add-in developers can target.
(b) to allow us to consume open source code that would otherwise conflict with the GPL (MS-PL licensed code, Apache licensed code, and original BSD licensed code).Notice that (a) is the norm for Eclipse and Visual Studio, and that the ecosystem of third party plugins relies on this, both Eclipse and Visual Studio would be severely limited if they limited the plugins to be all GPL licensed.
As I explained on the blog post, there are current users that need to run their non-GPL code inside the IDE.We want more third party developers to target MonoDevelop, and we want these third parties to consider MonoDevelop a platform that they can target without forcing a license on them.
Similar to how the Linux operating system can run code licensed under any license.The second reason is just a practical one.
In the .NET open source ecosystem there are plenty of libraries and tools available under the MS-PL, Old and New BSD and Apache 2 licenses and we want to be in a position to use those libraries without rewriting it.
We already do, and it has saved us a lot of time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30556214</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>hackus</author>
	<datestamp>1261847220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all, the internet I am talking about is the one corporate people are complaining about.</p><p>I would remind everyone here, that the corporate internet that is in use today, didn't actually become useful till around 1996.   The Internet I would argue didn't actually come into existence, and was still mainly "DarpaNET" until LINUX came onto the scene.</p><p>I think the reason is because of Linux OS Kernel.</p><p>LINUX is a OS kernel, it is not all of the driver packages that come with it, many of which as pointed out here are not GPL'ed.</p><p>Lastly, lots of applications have been pointed out here that are not GPL which form the plumbing of the corporate internet in which I speak of, tis true.</p><p>However, I would like to make a counter point: corporate America makes all of those "different" licenses "go" through the use of the LINUX OS kernel.<br>(Which, congratulations RedHat on another outstanding year, may it continue!)</p><p>I would also like all of you to think about WHY a GPL'ed kernel excelled, and positively beat the pants off of BSD using a supposedly "free-er" license with fewer "restrictions".  Not just from a technology perspective, but through also the understanding of how to make money building software.</p><p>I would also like to ask everyone to think about why companies continue to steal GPL code, when BSD style licensed alternatives clearly exist.</p><p>(Most recent Microsoft cases and "gadget" makers etc which I am sure all of you are aware of as slashdot readers in the recent weeks postings.)</p><p>-Hack</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all , the internet I am talking about is the one corporate people are complaining about.I would remind everyone here , that the corporate internet that is in use today , did n't actually become useful till around 1996 .
The Internet I would argue did n't actually come into existence , and was still mainly " DarpaNET " until LINUX came onto the scene.I think the reason is because of Linux OS Kernel.LINUX is a OS kernel , it is not all of the driver packages that come with it , many of which as pointed out here are not GPL'ed.Lastly , lots of applications have been pointed out here that are not GPL which form the plumbing of the corporate internet in which I speak of , t is true.However , I would like to make a counter point : corporate America makes all of those " different " licenses " go " through the use of the LINUX OS kernel .
( Which , congratulations RedHat on another outstanding year , may it continue !
) I would also like all of you to think about WHY a GPL'ed kernel excelled , and positively beat the pants off of BSD using a supposedly " free-er " license with fewer " restrictions " .
Not just from a technology perspective , but through also the understanding of how to make money building software.I would also like to ask everyone to think about why companies continue to steal GPL code , when BSD style licensed alternatives clearly exist .
( Most recent Microsoft cases and " gadget " makers etc which I am sure all of you are aware of as slashdot readers in the recent weeks postings .
) -Hack</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all, the internet I am talking about is the one corporate people are complaining about.I would remind everyone here, that the corporate internet that is in use today, didn't actually become useful till around 1996.
The Internet I would argue didn't actually come into existence, and was still mainly "DarpaNET" until LINUX came onto the scene.I think the reason is because of Linux OS Kernel.LINUX is a OS kernel, it is not all of the driver packages that come with it, many of which as pointed out here are not GPL'ed.Lastly, lots of applications have been pointed out here that are not GPL which form the plumbing of the corporate internet in which I speak of, tis true.However, I would like to make a counter point: corporate America makes all of those "different" licenses "go" through the use of the LINUX OS kernel.
(Which, congratulations RedHat on another outstanding year, may it continue!
)I would also like all of you to think about WHY a GPL'ed kernel excelled, and positively beat the pants off of BSD using a supposedly "free-er" license with fewer "restrictions".
Not just from a technology perspective, but through also the understanding of how to make money building software.I would also like to ask everyone to think about why companies continue to steal GPL code, when BSD style licensed alternatives clearly exist.
(Most recent Microsoft cases and "gadget" makers etc which I am sure all of you are aware of as slashdot readers in the recent weeks postings.
)-Hack</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545540</id>
	<title>Re:I think it's funny</title>
	<author>gregarican</author>
	<datestamp>1261680960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just downloaded the VMWare image for Mono running on OpenSUSE and will give it a test drive come January. It has been a few years since I checked in on Mono and if they are only perhaps one<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET version behind that might be worth a look. Checking their website I see they have methods to open up Visual Studio solution files and convert them to Mono and other neat bells and whistles that I wasn't aware of awhile back...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just downloaded the VMWare image for Mono running on OpenSUSE and will give it a test drive come January .
It has been a few years since I checked in on Mono and if they are only perhaps one .NET version behind that might be worth a look .
Checking their website I see they have methods to open up Visual Studio solution files and convert them to Mono and other neat bells and whistles that I was n't aware of awhile back.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just downloaded the VMWare image for Mono running on OpenSUSE and will give it a test drive come January.
It has been a few years since I checked in on Mono and if they are only perhaps one .NET version behind that might be worth a look.
Checking their website I see they have methods to open up Visual Studio solution files and convert them to Mono and other neat bells and whistles that I wasn't aware of awhile back...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544118</id>
	<title>GPL is SHIT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261671840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Richard Stallman smells like the GPL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Richard Stallman smells like the GPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Richard Stallman smells like the GPL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545508</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>eigenstates</author>
	<datestamp>1261680780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"P.S. Yes, C# being better than Java is personal opinion."</p><p>No, it isn't. C# is better than Java in every way. Well- alright, at least the ones you carefully list. I'll add that doing things one way instead of Java's myriad of (frequently inane) implementations is very relaxing when starting out on something new or when inheriting code from someone else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" P.S .
Yes , C # being better than Java is personal opinion .
" No , it is n't .
C # is better than Java in every way .
Well- alright , at least the ones you carefully list .
I 'll add that doing things one way instead of Java 's myriad of ( frequently inane ) implementations is very relaxing when starting out on something new or when inheriting code from someone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"P.S.
Yes, C# being better than Java is personal opinion.
"No, it isn't.
C# is better than Java in every way.
Well- alright, at least the ones you carefully list.
I'll add that doing things one way instead of Java's myriad of (frequently inane) implementations is very relaxing when starting out on something new or when inheriting code from someone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545746</id>
	<title>Re:A Prelude to Charges...</title>
	<author>eigenstates</author>
	<datestamp>1261682160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would any distro put itself in that position? And wouldn't the non-GPL nature of the project alone prevent that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would any distro put itself in that position ?
And would n't the non-GPL nature of the project alone prevent that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would any distro put itself in that position?
And wouldn't the non-GPL nature of the project alone prevent that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545962</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>MasterOfMagic</author>
	<datestamp>1261683600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545640</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>aztracker1</author>
	<datestamp>1261681620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>*sigh* they moved to LGPL, which means you can distribute it with a better compatibility with other non-GPL plugins (those Apache, MPL, BSD or other licenses).  If you modify the source, it still falls under GPL rules, it merely allows for bundled distribution with non-GPL code.  It's all open-source and the main package is simply LGPL, or are you saying you don't use/reference any LGPL libraries in your code.   Also, I'd presume that you don't use any Gnome or GTK libraries either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>* sigh * they moved to LGPL , which means you can distribute it with a better compatibility with other non-GPL plugins ( those Apache , MPL , BSD or other licenses ) .
If you modify the source , it still falls under GPL rules , it merely allows for bundled distribution with non-GPL code .
It 's all open-source and the main package is simply LGPL , or are you saying you do n't use/reference any LGPL libraries in your code .
Also , I 'd presume that you do n't use any Gnome or GTK libraries either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*sigh* they moved to LGPL, which means you can distribute it with a better compatibility with other non-GPL plugins (those Apache, MPL, BSD or other licenses).
If you modify the source, it still falls under GPL rules, it merely allows for bundled distribution with non-GPL code.
It's all open-source and the main package is simply LGPL, or are you saying you don't use/reference any LGPL libraries in your code.
Also, I'd presume that you don't use any Gnome or GTK libraries either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544866</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>poetmatt</author>
	<datestamp>1261676520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>saying GPLV3 is too strict when we know the specific issue at hand here, means that it's just that proprietary things can still be embedded in GPLV2 and can't in GPLv3. So when "too strict" means "you can't shove proprietary shit into a free and open system", that tells me that MS and the lackeys are having quite a hard time dealing with open source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>saying GPLV3 is too strict when we know the specific issue at hand here , means that it 's just that proprietary things can still be embedded in GPLV2 and ca n't in GPLv3 .
So when " too strict " means " you ca n't shove proprietary shit into a free and open system " , that tells me that MS and the lackeys are having quite a hard time dealing with open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>saying GPLV3 is too strict when we know the specific issue at hand here, means that it's just that proprietary things can still be embedded in GPLV2 and can't in GPLv3.
So when "too strict" means "you can't shove proprietary shit into a free and open system", that tells me that MS and the lackeys are having quite a hard time dealing with open source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544698</id>
	<title>Re:Use java instead</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261675620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article was about the IDE, MonoDevelop. Do you refuse to use Eclipse for Java development because Eclipse is not GPL? Or are you just too dumb to understand what the article is talking about?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article was about the IDE , MonoDevelop .
Do you refuse to use Eclipse for Java development because Eclipse is not GPL ?
Or are you just too dumb to understand what the article is talking about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article was about the IDE, MonoDevelop.
Do you refuse to use Eclipse for Java development because Eclipse is not GPL?
Or are you just too dumb to understand what the article is talking about?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549782</id>
	<title>Re:Debugger</title>
	<author>spongman</author>
	<datestamp>1261732680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wait, why is this funny? one of the 'i'-mods, maybe, but not funny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wait , why is this funny ?
one of the 'i'-mods , maybe , but not funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wait, why is this funny?
one of the 'i'-mods, maybe, but not funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550640</id>
	<title>Re:Eternal game of catch-up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261752600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(b) Better compatibility with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET: this is a simpler process than coming up with our own APIs.</p><p>So all you want to do is copy and be MS's code monkey, shame on you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( b ) Better compatibility with .NET : this is a simpler process than coming up with our own APIs.So all you want to do is copy and be MS 's code monkey , shame on you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(b) Better compatibility with .NET: this is a simpler process than coming up with our own APIs.So all you want to do is copy and be MS's code monkey, shame on you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544060</id>
	<title>Use java instead</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261671600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, now I'm even less like to use mono. Miquel is a cossack cock.  Remember folks, Java is now GPL.  Support free software, use java not infectious microsoft crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , now I 'm even less like to use mono .
Miquel is a cossack cock .
Remember folks , Java is now GPL .
Support free software , use java not infectious microsoft crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, now I'm even less like to use mono.
Miquel is a cossack cock.
Remember folks, Java is now GPL.
Support free software, use java not infectious microsoft crap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30619812</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230835260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Ah, okay-- so you really are saying that "a lot of Linux servers were connected to the Internet" means the same thing as "the internet was basically built on the GPL."
</p><p>
Great, glad we sorted that out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet was basically built on the GPL , and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL .
Ah , okay-- so you really are saying that " a lot of Linux servers were connected to the Internet " means the same thing as " the internet was basically built on the GPL .
" Great , glad we sorted that out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.
Ah, okay-- so you really are saying that "a lot of Linux servers were connected to the Internet" means the same thing as "the internet was basically built on the GPL.
"

Great, glad we sorted that out.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555352</id>
	<title>You can't fire me, I quit!</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1261836120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could it be "I am resigning before you can fire me" ?</p><p>I really don't think FSF/GNU and even large portion of Gnome users/developers aren't happy with what their once poster child has become. I started to check for mono dependencies in tools I install to OS X myself and as a Mac user, I am not really a "everything should be open" fanatic. I can't imagine what would actual Linux users and companies choosing Linux would think to be bound by some "promise" rather than something like gtk2 or linux itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could it be " I am resigning before you can fire me " ? I really do n't think FSF/GNU and even large portion of Gnome users/developers are n't happy with what their once poster child has become .
I started to check for mono dependencies in tools I install to OS X myself and as a Mac user , I am not really a " everything should be open " fanatic .
I ca n't imagine what would actual Linux users and companies choosing Linux would think to be bound by some " promise " rather than something like gtk2 or linux itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could it be "I am resigning before you can fire me" ?I really don't think FSF/GNU and even large portion of Gnome users/developers aren't happy with what their once poster child has become.
I started to check for mono dependencies in tools I install to OS X myself and as a Mac user, I am not really a "everything should be open" fanatic.
I can't imagine what would actual Linux users and companies choosing Linux would think to be bound by some "promise" rather than something like gtk2 or linux itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548734</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>poopdeville</author>
	<datestamp>1261670220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is the "w-word"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is the " w-word " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is the "w-word"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>AlexBirch</author>
	<datestamp>1261672440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>To be fair, OpenOffice.org isn't GPL, yet that's the text editor / presentation software I use.<br>
Are you going to stop that as well?<br>
You'd be surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint, it's the silent Apache HTTPD killer and yes, it uses<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET. That said, I've never heard of anyone using it with Mono.<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET and C# are pretty amazing technologies, especially with LINQ and Lambda expresssions, couple that with IronPython and you have a cool system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To be fair , OpenOffice.org is n't GPL , yet that 's the text editor / presentation software I use .
Are you going to stop that as well ?
You 'd be surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint , it 's the silent Apache HTTPD killer and yes , it uses .NET .
That said , I 've never heard of anyone using it with Mono .
.NET and C # are pretty amazing technologies , especially with LINQ and Lambda expresssions , couple that with IronPython and you have a cool system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be fair, OpenOffice.org isn't GPL, yet that's the text editor / presentation software I use.
Are you going to stop that as well?
You'd be surprised at how many corporations are going with Sharepoint, it's the silent Apache HTTPD killer and yes, it uses .NET.
That said, I've never heard of anyone using it with Mono.
.NET and C# are pretty amazing technologies, especially with LINQ and Lambda expresssions, couple that with IronPython and you have a cool system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545396</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261680000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FOSS =/= GPL</p><p>Many services running on the internet are FOSS, but not GPL. The Internet was built on research and development that wasn't all that open to start out. It now runs on mostly open protocols and services. If you really believe the Internet was built on GPL, you should really look at the licenses for a lot of the software running it, which are a lot newer than the concepts that went into building the Internet.</p><p>As open as the GPL is, it is highly restrictive, and is very unfriendly to business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FOSS = / = GPLMany services running on the internet are FOSS , but not GPL .
The Internet was built on research and development that was n't all that open to start out .
It now runs on mostly open protocols and services .
If you really believe the Internet was built on GPL , you should really look at the licenses for a lot of the software running it , which are a lot newer than the concepts that went into building the Internet.As open as the GPL is , it is highly restrictive , and is very unfriendly to business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FOSS =/= GPLMany services running on the internet are FOSS, but not GPL.
The Internet was built on research and development that wasn't all that open to start out.
It now runs on mostly open protocols and services.
If you really believe the Internet was built on GPL, you should really look at the licenses for a lot of the software running it, which are a lot newer than the concepts that went into building the Internet.As open as the GPL is, it is highly restrictive, and is very unfriendly to business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544122</id>
	<title>Debugger</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261671840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It looks like MonoDevelop finally gets a debugger. That was really the last thing tying me to Visual Studio for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net development.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks like MonoDevelop finally gets a debugger .
That was really the last thing tying me to Visual Studio for .net development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks like MonoDevelop finally gets a debugger.
That was really the last thing tying me to Visual Studio for .net development.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545498</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1261680720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Right, because Microsoft is making a profit off licensing the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET framework..</p></div><p>No, but they are smart enough to know if you can lock in as many people into your frameworks ( even if its just a virtual lock due to knowledge ), it only increases market share way down the road.</p><p>You have to think of the BIG picture, not what you can see if you look around your cube walls.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , because Microsoft is making a profit off licensing the .NET framework..No , but they are smart enough to know if you can lock in as many people into your frameworks ( even if its just a virtual lock due to knowledge ) , it only increases market share way down the road.You have to think of the BIG picture , not what you can see if you look around your cube walls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, because Microsoft is making a profit off licensing the .NET framework..No, but they are smart enough to know if you can lock in as many people into your frameworks ( even if its just a virtual lock due to knowledge ), it only increases market share way down the road.You have to think of the BIG picture, not what you can see if you look around your cube walls.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545704</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261681980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do not agree with what was done, but it is your project, and you do what ever you want.  You doing what you want with your software is what I support.  Please keeping doing what you want to do, this is part of the nature of freedom of truly free and open source software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not agree with what was done , but it is your project , and you do what ever you want .
You doing what you want with your software is what I support .
Please keeping doing what you want to do , this is part of the nature of freedom of truly free and open source software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not agree with what was done, but it is your project, and you do what ever you want.
You doing what you want with your software is what I support.
Please keeping doing what you want to do, this is part of the nature of freedom of truly free and open source software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549748</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>binarylarry</author>
	<datestamp>1261731840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What kind of fruity colleges are you referring to?</p><p>Practically every college on the planet teaches Java and C++....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What kind of fruity colleges are you referring to ? Practically every college on the planet teaches Java and C + + ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What kind of fruity colleges are you referring to?Practically every college on the planet teaches Java and C++....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146</id>
	<title>Good.</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1261672080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People who want to work for/shill for/suck up to Microsoft directly or indirectly should do that.</p><p>Those who don't support that sort of thing should work to cut them off at the knees by not using their software and discouraging others from doing so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People who want to work for/shill for/suck up to Microsoft directly or indirectly should do that.Those who do n't support that sort of thing should work to cut them off at the knees by not using their software and discouraging others from doing so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People who want to work for/shill for/suck up to Microsoft directly or indirectly should do that.Those who don't support that sort of thing should work to cut them off at the knees by not using their software and discouraging others from doing so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547218</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>Magic5Ball</author>
	<datestamp>1261651980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shh! Don't discuss broader strategic business needs, objectives and strategies in front of the IT grunts. That's like talking about hygiene and intercourse with WoW players.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shh !
Do n't discuss broader strategic business needs , objectives and strategies in front of the IT grunts .
That 's like talking about hygiene and intercourse with WoW players .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shh!
Don't discuss broader strategic business needs, objectives and strategies in front of the IT grunts.
That's like talking about hygiene and intercourse with WoW players.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546078</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261684500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(yes, pedantic types, I know it's all pass by reference, but you know what I mean)</p></div><p>There's no pass by reference in Java, it's all pass by value. Yes, I'm a pedantic Coward</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( yes , pedantic types , I know it 's all pass by reference , but you know what I mean ) There 's no pass by reference in Java , it 's all pass by value .
Yes , I 'm a pedantic Coward</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(yes, pedantic types, I know it's all pass by reference, but you know what I mean)There's no pass by reference in Java, it's all pass by value.
Yes, I'm a pedantic Coward
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544382</id>
	<title>"Free" is relative.</title>
	<author>RingDev</author>
	<datestamp>1261673580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "free" portion of open source licenses varies. Some licences provide more freedoms to the original developer and less to down stream developers. Some provide more to down stream providers, but less to implimenters. Some provide more freedom to those that impliment, but less to the authors.</p><p>Going from GPL to LGPL doesn't mean Mono is any less "free" it just means that there has been a tiny change in who it is that experience the greatest "freedom".</p><p>Then again, this is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. the article talks about a license change for a Linux implimentation of a MS technology. To prevent myself from getting modded -1 troll for not insulting Microsoft, I'll add: "rable rable rable! M$ tuk r jorbs!"</p><p>-Rick</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " free " portion of open source licenses varies .
Some licences provide more freedoms to the original developer and less to down stream developers .
Some provide more to down stream providers , but less to implimenters .
Some provide more freedom to those that impliment , but less to the authors.Going from GPL to LGPL does n't mean Mono is any less " free " it just means that there has been a tiny change in who it is that experience the greatest " freedom " .Then again , this is / .
the article talks about a license change for a Linux implimentation of a MS technology .
To prevent myself from getting modded -1 troll for not insulting Microsoft , I 'll add : " rable rable rable !
M $ tuk r jorbs !
" -Rick</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "free" portion of open source licenses varies.
Some licences provide more freedoms to the original developer and less to down stream developers.
Some provide more to down stream providers, but less to implimenters.
Some provide more freedom to those that impliment, but less to the authors.Going from GPL to LGPL doesn't mean Mono is any less "free" it just means that there has been a tiny change in who it is that experience the greatest "freedom".Then again, this is /.
the article talks about a license change for a Linux implimentation of a MS technology.
To prevent myself from getting modded -1 troll for not insulting Microsoft, I'll add: "rable rable rable!
M$ tuk r jorbs!
"-Rick</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547286</id>
	<title>Re:A Prelude to Charges...</title>
	<author>Dr\_Barnowl</author>
	<datestamp>1261652580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They already have commercial variants, it's multi-licensed for people who don't like the existing licensing profile.</p><p>I didn't see anyone saying the same things about MySQL.. well, not until Oracle bought it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They already have commercial variants , it 's multi-licensed for people who do n't like the existing licensing profile.I did n't see anyone saying the same things about MySQL.. well , not until Oracle bought it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They already have commercial variants, it's multi-licensed for people who don't like the existing licensing profile.I didn't see anyone saying the same things about MySQL.. well, not until Oracle bought it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545944</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1261683480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're thinking of <a href="http://opensource.org/licenses/ms-pl.html" title="opensource.org">Ms-RL</a> [opensource.org] which is much like GPL. The <a href="http://opensource.org/licenses/ms-pl.html" title="opensource.org">Ms-PL</a> [opensource.org] is more like BSD with a poison pill for patent litigation. (license ends if file a claim against a contributor)</p><p>In many ways I like the Ms-RL better than GPL, it's shorter and clearer. Even though I'm a total anti-MS person, they did write a more elegant license. (why can't their operating systems be so simple?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're thinking of Ms-RL [ opensource.org ] which is much like GPL .
The Ms-PL [ opensource.org ] is more like BSD with a poison pill for patent litigation .
( license ends if file a claim against a contributor ) In many ways I like the Ms-RL better than GPL , it 's shorter and clearer .
Even though I 'm a total anti-MS person , they did write a more elegant license .
( why ca n't their operating systems be so simple ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're thinking of Ms-RL [opensource.org] which is much like GPL.
The Ms-PL [opensource.org] is more like BSD with a poison pill for patent litigation.
(license ends if file a claim against a contributor)In many ways I like the Ms-RL better than GPL, it's shorter and clearer.
Even though I'm a total anti-MS person, they did write a more elegant license.
(why can't their operating systems be so simple?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546632</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261646160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Alas, Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution, just so they can have a note taking applet</i></p><p>Oh, "just" so they can have a single applet?  It couldn't possibly be because they think it is a generally useful way to develop applications, such as F-Stop and Banshee?</p><p>Mono may or may not be a good idea, but you are framing your argument in an intellectually dishonest way here.  That note-taking applet ("Tomboy") may be the only thing in standard GNOME that needs Mono right now, but I'm pretty sure that there will be others.</p><p><i>Even worse, there are folks pushing Banshee as the default music player so there's another dependency on Mono.</i></p><p>See?  Then it won't just be Tomboy, there will be other things using Mono.</p><p>I haven't tried C#, but a lot of people seem to like it.  If having C# means I get more free software to play with, I'm in favor of that.</p><p>The major argument I have seen against Mono is "Microsoft is just waiting and they will assert patent claims!!"  In that case, the <em>only</em> thing that they can do is force people to stop using C# and Mono.  In which case, all the Mono apps will be pulled or re-written.  And at that point, you would have what you seem to want: no more Mono in GNOME.</p><p>That is the worst-case scenario.  And I don't see it as being bad enough to try to keep people from using Mono.  If people want to use Mono to write free software, that's fine with me.</p><p>I'm curious: now that Java is becoming fully free, would you support re-writing Tomboy and F-Stop and the others in Java?  That way, instead of being bloated and slow C# applications, they could be bloated and slow Java applications.  Would you be happier?</p><p>In my day job, I write wicked fast C code (small memory footprint, too).  When I write software on my own for fun, it tends to be Python, which is even slower than C#.  Do you have a problem with Python too?</p><p>steveha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alas , Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution , just so they can have a note taking appletOh , " just " so they can have a single applet ?
It could n't possibly be because they think it is a generally useful way to develop applications , such as F-Stop and Banshee ? Mono may or may not be a good idea , but you are framing your argument in an intellectually dishonest way here .
That note-taking applet ( " Tomboy " ) may be the only thing in standard GNOME that needs Mono right now , but I 'm pretty sure that there will be others.Even worse , there are folks pushing Banshee as the default music player so there 's another dependency on Mono.See ?
Then it wo n't just be Tomboy , there will be other things using Mono.I have n't tried C # , but a lot of people seem to like it .
If having C # means I get more free software to play with , I 'm in favor of that.The major argument I have seen against Mono is " Microsoft is just waiting and they will assert patent claims ! !
" In that case , the only thing that they can do is force people to stop using C # and Mono .
In which case , all the Mono apps will be pulled or re-written .
And at that point , you would have what you seem to want : no more Mono in GNOME.That is the worst-case scenario .
And I do n't see it as being bad enough to try to keep people from using Mono .
If people want to use Mono to write free software , that 's fine with me.I 'm curious : now that Java is becoming fully free , would you support re-writing Tomboy and F-Stop and the others in Java ?
That way , instead of being bloated and slow C # applications , they could be bloated and slow Java applications .
Would you be happier ? In my day job , I write wicked fast C code ( small memory footprint , too ) .
When I write software on my own for fun , it tends to be Python , which is even slower than C # .
Do you have a problem with Python too ? steveha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alas, Mono is still a part of the default Gnome distribution, just so they can have a note taking appletOh, "just" so they can have a single applet?
It couldn't possibly be because they think it is a generally useful way to develop applications, such as F-Stop and Banshee?Mono may or may not be a good idea, but you are framing your argument in an intellectually dishonest way here.
That note-taking applet ("Tomboy") may be the only thing in standard GNOME that needs Mono right now, but I'm pretty sure that there will be others.Even worse, there are folks pushing Banshee as the default music player so there's another dependency on Mono.See?
Then it won't just be Tomboy, there will be other things using Mono.I haven't tried C#, but a lot of people seem to like it.
If having C# means I get more free software to play with, I'm in favor of that.The major argument I have seen against Mono is "Microsoft is just waiting and they will assert patent claims!!
"  In that case, the only thing that they can do is force people to stop using C# and Mono.
In which case, all the Mono apps will be pulled or re-written.
And at that point, you would have what you seem to want: no more Mono in GNOME.That is the worst-case scenario.
And I don't see it as being bad enough to try to keep people from using Mono.
If people want to use Mono to write free software, that's fine with me.I'm curious: now that Java is becoming fully free, would you support re-writing Tomboy and F-Stop and the others in Java?
That way, instead of being bloated and slow C# applications, they could be bloated and slow Java applications.
Would you be happier?In my day job, I write wicked fast C code (small memory footprint, too).
When I write software on my own for fun, it tends to be Python, which is even slower than C#.
Do you have a problem with Python too?steveha</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546690</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261646940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"to allow us to consume open source code"</p><p>You really should chose your words a little more carefully, given your position...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" to allow us to consume open source code " You really should chose your words a little more carefully , given your position.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"to allow us to consume open source code"You really should chose your words a little more carefully, given your position...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547126</id>
	<title>Here we go again</title>
	<author>SpoodyGoon</author>
	<datestamp>1261651080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh no Microsoft is out to get us all... blah blah bla anyone who looks at Microsoft or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET is evil blah blah blah... these are the people who are the Rush Limbaugh of the software world. Next thing you know we'll be hearing about Linux death squads.

Mono is here and it is not going to go away no matter how hard you complain, I can prove my point by showing that Ubuntu while not my personal favorite OS is continueing to use Mono and has no plans to stop. If you don't want to use Mono that's fine no problem, but please don't use Mono quietly there are software developers trying to work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh no Microsoft is out to get us all... blah blah bla anyone who looks at Microsoft or .NET is evil blah blah blah... these are the people who are the Rush Limbaugh of the software world .
Next thing you know we 'll be hearing about Linux death squads .
Mono is here and it is not going to go away no matter how hard you complain , I can prove my point by showing that Ubuntu while not my personal favorite OS is continueing to use Mono and has no plans to stop .
If you do n't want to use Mono that 's fine no problem , but please do n't use Mono quietly there are software developers trying to work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh no Microsoft is out to get us all... blah blah bla anyone who looks at Microsoft or .NET is evil blah blah blah... these are the people who are the Rush Limbaugh of the software world.
Next thing you know we'll be hearing about Linux death squads.
Mono is here and it is not going to go away no matter how hard you complain, I can prove my point by showing that Ubuntu while not my personal favorite OS is continueing to use Mono and has no plans to stop.
If you don't want to use Mono that's fine no problem, but please don't use Mono quietly there are software developers trying to work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544800</id>
	<title>no more GPL for MS shills</title>
	<author>shareme</author>
	<datestamp>1261676160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now we know the real reason why MDI agents were attempting to get Gnome to vote to cede from GNU/FSF..</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now we know the real reason why MDI agents were attempting to get Gnome to vote to cede from GNU/FSF. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now we know the real reason why MDI agents were attempting to get Gnome to vote to cede from GNU/FSF..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544426</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261673940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are plenty of other FOSS licenses that aren't the GPL...a lot of them are, in fact, less restrictive than the GPL when it comes to the use of other licenses in the same suite.  Not that I really have a lot of personal experience with it, but I do know there are a lot of businesses (and government) out there that won't even touch GPL (proper, not LGPL) software for the licensing ramifications if they were to extend it, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are plenty of other FOSS licenses that are n't the GPL...a lot of them are , in fact , less restrictive than the GPL when it comes to the use of other licenses in the same suite .
Not that I really have a lot of personal experience with it , but I do know there are a lot of businesses ( and government ) out there that wo n't even touch GPL ( proper , not LGPL ) software for the licensing ramifications if they were to extend it , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are plenty of other FOSS licenses that aren't the GPL...a lot of them are, in fact, less restrictive than the GPL when it comes to the use of other licenses in the same suite.
Not that I really have a lot of personal experience with it, but I do know there are a lot of businesses (and government) out there that won't even touch GPL (proper, not LGPL) software for the licensing ramifications if they were to extend it, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544540</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261674660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rumor is that he tried and failed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rumor is that he tried and failed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rumor is that he tried and failed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545002</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261677480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wouldn't be surprised as <b>Microsoft's investment in astroturfing</b> increases that more and more pressure to not be GPL will come up.</p></div><p>Everybody knows De Icaza is a MS shill.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't be surprised as Microsoft 's investment in astroturfing increases that more and more pressure to not be GPL will come up.Everybody knows De Icaza is a MS shill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't be surprised as Microsoft's investment in astroturfing increases that more and more pressure to not be GPL will come up.Everybody knows De Icaza is a MS shill.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545172</id>
	<title>Re:Richard Stallman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261678500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He DOES exist!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He DOES exist !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He DOES exist!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546188</id>
	<title>Re:BURN HIM !! BURN HIM !!</title>
	<author>7-Vodka</author>
	<datestamp>1261685460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sir,</p><p>
You have made a nuanced and intricate post and I find myself very much relating to your sentiments.</p><p>
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sir , You have made a nuanced and intricate post and I find myself very much relating to your sentiments .
Your ideas are intriguing to me , and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sir,
You have made a nuanced and intricate post and I find myself very much relating to your sentiments.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545026</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261677600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(yes, pedantic types, I know it's all pass by reference, but you know what I mean)</p></div><p>If you're talking about being pedantic, you should look up what "pass by reference" actually means.  (Hint: it's not what Java has)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( yes , pedantic types , I know it 's all pass by reference , but you know what I mean ) If you 're talking about being pedantic , you should look up what " pass by reference " actually means .
( Hint : it 's not what Java has )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(yes, pedantic types, I know it's all pass by reference, but you know what I mean)If you're talking about being pedantic, you should look up what "pass by reference" actually means.
(Hint: it's not what Java has)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544084</id>
	<title>BURN HIM !! BURN HIM !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261671720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Burn him !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Burn him !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Burn him !
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548360</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1261663560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft has been very clear that even though they're not charging for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net at the moment, they believe that people should be paying to use Microsoft IP. Removing GPL code from anything they use is a natural first step towards that goal. Is everyone involved in Mono working towards that goal? Probably not. But it's clearly what Microsoft wants.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft has been very clear that even though they 're not charging for .Net at the moment , they believe that people should be paying to use Microsoft IP .
Removing GPL code from anything they use is a natural first step towards that goal .
Is everyone involved in Mono working towards that goal ?
Probably not .
But it 's clearly what Microsoft wants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft has been very clear that even though they're not charging for .Net at the moment, they believe that people should be paying to use Microsoft IP.
Removing GPL code from anything they use is a natural first step towards that goal.
Is everyone involved in Mono working towards that goal?
Probably not.
But it's clearly what Microsoft wants.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544924</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261676880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Wait, you mean they don't charge a cent for it?</i></p><p>They don't have to. If something is developed with it you have ensured the users remain tied into MS cash streams. It's all about vendor lock in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , you mean they do n't charge a cent for it ? They do n't have to .
If something is developed with it you have ensured the users remain tied into MS cash streams .
It 's all about vendor lock in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, you mean they don't charge a cent for it?They don't have to.
If something is developed with it you have ensured the users remain tied into MS cash streams.
It's all about vendor lock in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>backwardMechanic</author>
	<datestamp>1261673160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>OpenOffice.org is your TEXT EDITOR? Oh boy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OpenOffice.org is your TEXT EDITOR ?
Oh boy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OpenOffice.org is your TEXT EDITOR?
Oh boy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544368</id>
	<title>Re:A Prelude to Charges...</title>
	<author>DMiax</author>
	<datestamp>1261673580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They will simply not package the closed source version, ship the last open source one and deprecate the use of Mono for the future. Remember: <b>there is no lock-in with Free Software</b>. It cannot happen, period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They will simply not package the closed source version , ship the last open source one and deprecate the use of Mono for the future .
Remember : there is no lock-in with Free Software .
It can not happen , period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will simply not package the closed source version, ship the last open source one and deprecate the use of Mono for the future.
Remember: there is no lock-in with Free Software.
It cannot happen, period.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547528</id>
	<title>Re:Now for business use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261654500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course they did. What's not to love about getting people to work for you for free? It's better than having your own third world country with an enslaved population.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course they did .
What 's not to love about getting people to work for you for free ?
It 's better than having your own third world country with an enslaved population .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course they did.
What's not to love about getting people to work for you for free?
It's better than having your own third world country with an enslaved population.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550254</id>
	<title>Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261744020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, for users to have the freedom to do what they wanted, they had to strip it of the code that is licensed under a "free" license. Maybe, one day, others will also see how restrictive the GPL really is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , for users to have the freedom to do what they wanted , they had to strip it of the code that is licensed under a " free " license .
Maybe , one day , others will also see how restrictive the GPL really is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, for users to have the freedom to do what they wanted, they had to strip it of the code that is licensed under a "free" license.
Maybe, one day, others will also see how restrictive the GPL really is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549920</id>
	<title>Re:Eternal game of catch-up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261734840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The subset examples you gave are largely those which people have reason to specifically target. Any issues with a missing mapping of functionality is easily worked around for the specific cases they are used. Mono however, is decidedly not targeted by the majority of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET developers, and any missing functionality it displays will hinder uptake or conversions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The subset examples you gave are largely those which people have reason to specifically target .
Any issues with a missing mapping of functionality is easily worked around for the specific cases they are used .
Mono however , is decidedly not targeted by the majority of .NET developers , and any missing functionality it displays will hinder uptake or conversions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The subset examples you gave are largely those which people have reason to specifically target.
Any issues with a missing mapping of functionality is easily worked around for the specific cases they are used.
Mono however, is decidedly not targeted by the majority of .NET developers, and any missing functionality it displays will hinder uptake or conversions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545362</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1261679760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you will "fix" the licensing problem by making changes so it will use a quagmire of different product licenses. That's just awesome. How is the MS-PL license any "better" than GPL, since redistribution is only permitted under the MS-PL? Oh right. Because <i>Microsoft</i> wrote the license.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you will " fix " the licensing problem by making changes so it will use a quagmire of different product licenses .
That 's just awesome .
How is the MS-PL license any " better " than GPL , since redistribution is only permitted under the MS-PL ?
Oh right .
Because Microsoft wrote the license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you will "fix" the licensing problem by making changes so it will use a quagmire of different product licenses.
That's just awesome.
How is the MS-PL license any "better" than GPL, since redistribution is only permitted under the MS-PL?
Oh right.
Because Microsoft wrote the license.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544454</id>
	<title>Re:A Prelude to Charges...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261674120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By removing the last of the GPL code (inherited from forked SharpDevelop) from the IDE: MonoDevelop, it is now possible for people to write commercial/non-GPL plugins for MonoDevelop, just like the article says.</p><p>This puts it on equal ground with Eclipse, except MonoDevelop is LGPL which is GPL compatible, and Eclipse has their own license which is not GPL compatible.</p><p>This has nothing to do with Mono itself, which has always been LGPL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By removing the last of the GPL code ( inherited from forked SharpDevelop ) from the IDE : MonoDevelop , it is now possible for people to write commercial/non-GPL plugins for MonoDevelop , just like the article says.This puts it on equal ground with Eclipse , except MonoDevelop is LGPL which is GPL compatible , and Eclipse has their own license which is not GPL compatible.This has nothing to do with Mono itself , which has always been LGPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By removing the last of the GPL code (inherited from forked SharpDevelop) from the IDE: MonoDevelop, it is now possible for people to write commercial/non-GPL plugins for MonoDevelop, just like the article says.This puts it on equal ground with Eclipse, except MonoDevelop is LGPL which is GPL compatible, and Eclipse has their own license which is not GPL compatible.This has nothing to do with Mono itself, which has always been LGPL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545916</id>
	<title>I just love it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261683240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just love watching all you open-source zealots attack each other.  Miguel de Icaza has forgotten more about software than most of you will ever learn.  But you feel justified in attacking the work he is doing, all because it has the stench of the hated Microsoft about it.  And all without any regard to the real value of de Icaza's work.</p><p>And Microsoft -- Microsoft that you just love to hate, you little fan boy -- has also done far more good than any of you will ever do, for software engineering and for real people, not just zealots.</p><p>So go on.  Froth at the mouth.  Attack each other.  I'm a Microsoft employee, have been for years, and I just fucking LOVE it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just love watching all you open-source zealots attack each other .
Miguel de Icaza has forgotten more about software than most of you will ever learn .
But you feel justified in attacking the work he is doing , all because it has the stench of the hated Microsoft about it .
And all without any regard to the real value of de Icaza 's work.And Microsoft -- Microsoft that you just love to hate , you little fan boy -- has also done far more good than any of you will ever do , for software engineering and for real people , not just zealots.So go on .
Froth at the mouth .
Attack each other .
I 'm a Microsoft employee , have been for years , and I just fucking LOVE it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just love watching all you open-source zealots attack each other.
Miguel de Icaza has forgotten more about software than most of you will ever learn.
But you feel justified in attacking the work he is doing, all because it has the stench of the hated Microsoft about it.
And all without any regard to the real value of de Icaza's work.And Microsoft -- Microsoft that you just love to hate, you little fan boy -- has also done far more good than any of you will ever do, for software engineering and for real people, not just zealots.So go on.
Froth at the mouth.
Attack each other.
I'm a Microsoft employee, have been for years, and I just fucking LOVE it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546592</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>ajs</author>
	<datestamp>1261645740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project? And can anyone tell me, since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL...</p></div><p>The GPL isn't suitable for libraries due to its requirement that all library consumers be GPL. It's not a fundamentalist stance, and at one point, even RMS agreed with this point (hence his introduction of the LGPL). It was only with the growth of GPLed software that the FSF decided that they no longer liked that idea. As long as they were the little fish in the pond, playing nice with everyone else's licensing terms seemed like a good idea...</p><p>Now, I like the GPL. I've used it many times. But to suggest that moving from the GPL to the LGPL (essentially just dropping the "you can't use this with your code if your code isn't GPLed") would make source code more "closed" is absurd. It's, in fact, a more open and permissive license.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project ?
And can anyone tell me , since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL...The GPL is n't suitable for libraries due to its requirement that all library consumers be GPL .
It 's not a fundamentalist stance , and at one point , even RMS agreed with this point ( hence his introduction of the LGPL ) .
It was only with the growth of GPLed software that the FSF decided that they no longer liked that idea .
As long as they were the little fish in the pond , playing nice with everyone else 's licensing terms seemed like a good idea...Now , I like the GPL .
I 've used it many times .
But to suggest that moving from the GPL to the LGPL ( essentially just dropping the " you ca n't use this with your code if your code is n't GPLed " ) would make source code more " closed " is absurd .
It 's , in fact , a more open and permissive license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project?
And can anyone tell me, since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL...The GPL isn't suitable for libraries due to its requirement that all library consumers be GPL.
It's not a fundamentalist stance, and at one point, even RMS agreed with this point (hence his introduction of the LGPL).
It was only with the growth of GPLed software that the FSF decided that they no longer liked that idea.
As long as they were the little fish in the pond, playing nice with everyone else's licensing terms seemed like a good idea...Now, I like the GPL.
I've used it many times.
But to suggest that moving from the GPL to the LGPL (essentially just dropping the "you can't use this with your code if your code isn't GPLed") would make source code more "closed" is absurd.
It's, in fact, a more open and permissive license.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544440</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>DMiax</author>
	<datestamp>1261674000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is still LGPL, there are plenty of libraries like that including Qt and Gtk and no one bitches about them being less free. I would never use Mono (Qt is so much better in every way), but please do not spread misinformation about software licenses. This licensing choice is perfectly good for Mono as it is for other projects.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is still LGPL , there are plenty of libraries like that including Qt and Gtk and no one bitches about them being less free .
I would never use Mono ( Qt is so much better in every way ) , but please do not spread misinformation about software licenses .
This licensing choice is perfectly good for Mono as it is for other projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is still LGPL, there are plenty of libraries like that including Qt and Gtk and no one bitches about them being less free.
I would never use Mono (Qt is so much better in every way), but please do not spread misinformation about software licenses.
This licensing choice is perfectly good for Mono as it is for other projects.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545212</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1261678740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you know he isn't working for them already? Maybe this event is just the first step towards using the Microsoft license. It would make sense, because I'm sure Microsoft would like to get a working version of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET to compete with everyone else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you know he is n't working for them already ?
Maybe this event is just the first step towards using the Microsoft license .
It would make sense , because I 'm sure Microsoft would like to get a working version of .NET to compete with everyone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you know he isn't working for them already?
Maybe this event is just the first step towards using the Microsoft license.
It would make sense, because I'm sure Microsoft would like to get a working version of .NET to compete with everyone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545866</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1261683000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only OpenOffice was as good at editing TEXT as vim or emacs.</p><p>Q: My Python program won't run. I typed in my program in OpenOffice and renamed it foo.py...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only OpenOffice was as good at editing TEXT as vim or emacs.Q : My Python program wo n't run .
I typed in my program in OpenOffice and renamed it foo.py.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only OpenOffice was as good at editing TEXT as vim or emacs.Q: My Python program won't run.
I typed in my program in OpenOffice and renamed it foo.py...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548948</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261673640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>can you name anything under the BSD licence that is not derivative? TCP/IP? derivative of previous communications standards... sendmail? derivative of previous mail agents.<br>usenet? is usenet BSD? what? something is wrong here...</p><p>Don't claim that nothing original comes under the GPL. GPL Software is as original as all software; i.e. borrows the best and improves the rest.</p><p>Please don't fan the flames, both licences have their uses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>can you name anything under the BSD licence that is not derivative ?
TCP/IP ? derivative of previous communications standards... sendmail ? derivative of previous mail agents.usenet ?
is usenet BSD ?
what ? something is wrong here...Do n't claim that nothing original comes under the GPL .
GPL Software is as original as all software ; i.e .
borrows the best and improves the rest.Please do n't fan the flames , both licences have their uses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>can you name anything under the BSD licence that is not derivative?
TCP/IP? derivative of previous communications standards... sendmail? derivative of previous mail agents.usenet?
is usenet BSD?
what? something is wrong here...Don't claim that nothing original comes under the GPL.
GPL Software is as original as all software; i.e.
borrows the best and improves the rest.Please don't fan the flames, both licences have their uses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545300</id>
	<title>Re:Mono Blows (hint, where's FW 3.5)</title>
	<author>Waffle Iron</author>
	<datestamp>1261679340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I mean, come on, where's WPF? Where's WCF? Where's LINQ to SQL?</p></div><p>One place to look for those things would be on the desk of an examiner at the US Patent Office.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , come on , where 's WPF ?
Where 's WCF ?
Where 's LINQ to SQL ? One place to look for those things would be on the desk of an examiner at the US Patent Office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I mean, come on, where's WPF?
Where's WCF?
Where's LINQ to SQL?One place to look for those things would be on the desk of an examiner at the US Patent Office.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545008</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1261677480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No it doesn't.  The LGPL allows you to combine the program with non-free / non-opensource code, and that bit could be where the Tivoised component is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No it does n't .
The LGPL allows you to combine the program with non-free / non-opensource code , and that bit could be where the Tivoised component is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it doesn't.
The LGPL allows you to combine the program with non-free / non-opensource code, and that bit could be where the Tivoised component is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544692</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>tokul</author>
	<datestamp>1261675620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>That said, I've never heard of anyone using it with Mono.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Beer is very good and healthy drink. I've never heard of anyone drinking it from wine glasses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That said , I 've never heard of anyone using it with Mono .
Beer is very good and healthy drink .
I 've never heard of anyone drinking it from wine glasses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That said, I've never heard of anyone using it with Mono.
Beer is very good and healthy drink.
I've never heard of anyone drinking it from wine glasses.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544210</id>
	<title>This makes sense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261672500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The GPL is great for standalone applications but if you want to allow developers to make addons you really have to rethink it. Yes, it ensures that any addon made for the application will be free software however you have to consider the tradeoff; GPL it: everything is GLP'd, some companies/people won't develop or release addons; Other license: non-freesoftware addons may be developed, companies/people will have no reason now to release their software but it may not be open.<br> <br>

So it depends on what you value more; having the software but maybe not the freedom, or not having the software.<br> <br>

Obviously Stallman would rather the software was never created if it wasn't open, so the GPL wins for him there.<br> <br>

Personally I prefer the Artistic License 2.0; all the freedom and protection of the GPL without the virality.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The GPL is great for standalone applications but if you want to allow developers to make addons you really have to rethink it .
Yes , it ensures that any addon made for the application will be free software however you have to consider the tradeoff ; GPL it : everything is GLP 'd , some companies/people wo n't develop or release addons ; Other license : non-freesoftware addons may be developed , companies/people will have no reason now to release their software but it may not be open .
So it depends on what you value more ; having the software but maybe not the freedom , or not having the software .
Obviously Stallman would rather the software was never created if it was n't open , so the GPL wins for him there .
Personally I prefer the Artistic License 2.0 ; all the freedom and protection of the GPL without the virality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GPL is great for standalone applications but if you want to allow developers to make addons you really have to rethink it.
Yes, it ensures that any addon made for the application will be free software however you have to consider the tradeoff; GPL it: everything is GLP'd, some companies/people won't develop or release addons; Other license: non-freesoftware addons may be developed, companies/people will have no reason now to release their software but it may not be open.
So it depends on what you value more; having the software but maybe not the freedom, or not having the software.
Obviously Stallman would rather the software was never created if it wasn't open, so the GPL wins for him there.
Personally I prefer the Artistic License 2.0; all the freedom and protection of the GPL without the virality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545638</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261681560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You and Stallmanretard can sit a cry all you want - that doesn't change the fact that open source (let alone "Free Software" holy-be-thou-nameth) is a miserable <i>failure</i> on the desktop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You and Stallmanretard can sit a cry all you want - that does n't change the fact that open source ( let alone " Free Software " holy-be-thou-nameth ) is a miserable failure on the desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You and Stallmanretard can sit a cry all you want - that doesn't change the fact that open source (let alone "Free Software" holy-be-thou-nameth) is a miserable failure on the desktop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550614</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261751940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mate you are a M$ bitch...who has no morals...you sold yr soul to the devil. By your actions you are putting a lot of open source software &amp; ideals at risk. You are exposing a lot of peoples hard work to corporate greed.</p><p>Live with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mate you are a M $ bitch...who has no morals...you sold yr soul to the devil .
By your actions you are putting a lot of open source software &amp; ideals at risk .
You are exposing a lot of peoples hard work to corporate greed.Live with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mate you are a M$ bitch...who has no morals...you sold yr soul to the devil.
By your actions you are putting a lot of open source software &amp; ideals at risk.
You are exposing a lot of peoples hard work to corporate greed.Live with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>ShadowRangerRIT</author>
	<datestamp>1261675260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right, because Microsoft is making a profit off licensing the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET framework. Wait, you mean they don't charge a cent for it? And C# is a better language than Java, with the Mono project providing cross-platform compatibility, so Windows users have an easier time migrating to Linux if they so choose? Clearly I should listen to random<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.er and forswear all use of anything that "supports" "Microsoft products" in any way, including the OpenOffice; after all, it lets people read and write Office documents, and by doing so, indirectly enables the Microsoft hegemony.</p><p>P.S. Yes, C# being better than Java is personal opinion. I've used both, Java for two years in school and one and a half years in the workforce, C# for a little under a year in school and half a year in the workforce (plus a few years of various other languages, mostly C/C++ and, yes, Perl). For developers, the lack of rigid ideological adherence to OO dogma is quite helpful; delegates for callbacks and "pass-by-reference" for arguments instead of inane wrapper classes for both (yes, pedantic types, I know it's all pass by reference, but you know what I mean), not needing to think about auto-boxing as much (since<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET collections of primitives really are primitives, not boxed primitives), operator overloading and structs to enable the creation of relatively efficient and easy to use numeric types, etc. I think both languages have merit, and I think both languages are improved by the competition (e.g. without C#, I'm not sure Java would ever have introduced generics, since it violated the spirit of OO). But I'm not going to reject C# just because MS made it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , because Microsoft is making a profit off licensing the .NET framework .
Wait , you mean they do n't charge a cent for it ?
And C # is a better language than Java , with the Mono project providing cross-platform compatibility , so Windows users have an easier time migrating to Linux if they so choose ?
Clearly I should listen to random /.er and forswear all use of anything that " supports " " Microsoft products " in any way , including the OpenOffice ; after all , it lets people read and write Office documents , and by doing so , indirectly enables the Microsoft hegemony.P.S .
Yes , C # being better than Java is personal opinion .
I 've used both , Java for two years in school and one and a half years in the workforce , C # for a little under a year in school and half a year in the workforce ( plus a few years of various other languages , mostly C/C + + and , yes , Perl ) .
For developers , the lack of rigid ideological adherence to OO dogma is quite helpful ; delegates for callbacks and " pass-by-reference " for arguments instead of inane wrapper classes for both ( yes , pedantic types , I know it 's all pass by reference , but you know what I mean ) , not needing to think about auto-boxing as much ( since .NET collections of primitives really are primitives , not boxed primitives ) , operator overloading and structs to enable the creation of relatively efficient and easy to use numeric types , etc .
I think both languages have merit , and I think both languages are improved by the competition ( e.g .
without C # , I 'm not sure Java would ever have introduced generics , since it violated the spirit of OO ) .
But I 'm not going to reject C # just because MS made it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, because Microsoft is making a profit off licensing the .NET framework.
Wait, you mean they don't charge a cent for it?
And C# is a better language than Java, with the Mono project providing cross-platform compatibility, so Windows users have an easier time migrating to Linux if they so choose?
Clearly I should listen to random /.er and forswear all use of anything that "supports" "Microsoft products" in any way, including the OpenOffice; after all, it lets people read and write Office documents, and by doing so, indirectly enables the Microsoft hegemony.P.S.
Yes, C# being better than Java is personal opinion.
I've used both, Java for two years in school and one and a half years in the workforce, C# for a little under a year in school and half a year in the workforce (plus a few years of various other languages, mostly C/C++ and, yes, Perl).
For developers, the lack of rigid ideological adherence to OO dogma is quite helpful; delegates for callbacks and "pass-by-reference" for arguments instead of inane wrapper classes for both (yes, pedantic types, I know it's all pass by reference, but you know what I mean), not needing to think about auto-boxing as much (since .NET collections of primitives really are primitives, not boxed primitives), operator overloading and structs to enable the creation of relatively efficient and easy to use numeric types, etc.
I think both languages have merit, and I think both languages are improved by the competition (e.g.
without C#, I'm not sure Java would ever have introduced generics, since it violated the spirit of OO).
But I'm not going to reject C# just because MS made it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30553636</id>
	<title>LEAVE MIGUEL ALONE!</title>
	<author>kimb</author>
	<datestamp>1261752360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how fucking dare <em>anyone</em> out there make fun of
Miguel after all he has been through!</p><p>He never received a degree, he was dissed by Microsoft. He
founded at least two fucked-up projects, his hero turned out to
be ***gulp*** a user, a cheater, and now he's going through a
license change battle. All you people care about is ***ew, ugh***
freedom and not making money off of software. HE'S A HUMAN!</p><p>What you don't realize is that Miguel is making you all so
much more interoperable and all you do is write a bunch of crap
about him.</p><p>He hasn't blogged how awesome Microsoft is in days. His project
was called Gnome for a reason because all you people
want is GNU GNU GNU GNU GNU!! LEAVE HIM ALONE...</p><p>You're lucky he even coded for you BASTARDS! LEAVE MIGUEL
ALONE!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Please.</p><p>***wipes tears***</p><p>Richard Stallman talked about freedom and said software should
be free no matter what. ***gulp*** Speaking of freedom, when is
it freedom-loving to publicly bash (no pun intended) someone who
is going through a hard time. LEAVE MIGUEL ALOHONE!
PUHlehase...</p><p>Leave Miguel de Icaza alone right NOW! I mean it! Anyone who
has a problem with him, you deal with Balmer, because he's not
well right now.</p><p>***cries a river*** ***gulp***</p><p>Leave him alone...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how fucking dare anyone out there make fun of Miguel after all he has been through ! He never received a degree , he was dissed by Microsoft .
He founded at least two fucked-up projects , his hero turned out to be * * * gulp * * * a user , a cheater , and now he 's going through a license change battle .
All you people care about is * * * ew , ugh * * * freedom and not making money off of software .
HE 'S A HUMAN ! What you do n't realize is that Miguel is making you all so much more interoperable and all you do is write a bunch of crap about him.He has n't blogged how awesome Microsoft is in days .
His project was called Gnome for a reason because all you people want is GNU GNU GNU GNU GNU ! !
LEAVE HIM ALONE...You 're lucky he even coded for you BASTARDS !
LEAVE MIGUEL ALONE !
... Please .
* * * wipes tears * * * Richard Stallman talked about freedom and said software should be free no matter what .
* * * gulp * * * Speaking of freedom , when is it freedom-loving to publicly bash ( no pun intended ) someone who is going through a hard time .
LEAVE MIGUEL ALOHONE !
PUHlehase...Leave Miguel de Icaza alone right NOW !
I mean it !
Anyone who has a problem with him , you deal with Balmer , because he 's not well right now .
* * * cries a river * * * * * * gulp * * * Leave him alone.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how fucking dare anyone out there make fun of
Miguel after all he has been through!He never received a degree, he was dissed by Microsoft.
He
founded at least two fucked-up projects, his hero turned out to
be ***gulp*** a user, a cheater, and now he's going through a
license change battle.
All you people care about is ***ew, ugh***
freedom and not making money off of software.
HE'S A HUMAN!What you don't realize is that Miguel is making you all so
much more interoperable and all you do is write a bunch of crap
about him.He hasn't blogged how awesome Microsoft is in days.
His project
was called Gnome for a reason because all you people
want is GNU GNU GNU GNU GNU!!
LEAVE HIM ALONE...You're lucky he even coded for you BASTARDS!
LEAVE MIGUEL
ALONE!
... Please.
***wipes tears***Richard Stallman talked about freedom and said software should
be free no matter what.
***gulp*** Speaking of freedom, when is
it freedom-loving to publicly bash (no pun intended) someone who
is going through a hard time.
LEAVE MIGUEL ALOHONE!
PUHlehase...Leave Miguel de Icaza alone right NOW!
I mean it!
Anyone who
has a problem with him, you deal with Balmer, because he's not
well right now.
***cries a river*** ***gulp***Leave him alone...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547034</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Alcemenes</author>
	<datestamp>1261650300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would expect the pedantic police will be out in force to correct your usage of the word "derivitive" but otherwise your point is well made.  Personnally, I don't think the problem with the GPL is the license itself.  I use it occassionally even though I prefer the less complicated BSD-style licenses.  My problem are the legions of Stalmanistas who attack anyone who criticizes the GPL.  These same people like to point out how using software licensed any other way makes you a slave to the developer yet they drive cars made by someone else, wear clothes produced by someone else, and often eat food that is prepared by someone else.  Using their arguments they are just as much of a slave to the manufacturing and service industries as computer users are to software companies.  The fact of the matter is, we are all a "slave" to something.  We all enjoy having our choice but some seem to forget one very important choice; if you don't like something, then don't use it.  You have that choice too.  And please don't argue with me because I didn't make the same choice as you.  I realize that is part of human nature, but there are bigger and more important things in life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would expect the pedantic police will be out in force to correct your usage of the word " derivitive " but otherwise your point is well made .
Personnally , I do n't think the problem with the GPL is the license itself .
I use it occassionally even though I prefer the less complicated BSD-style licenses .
My problem are the legions of Stalmanistas who attack anyone who criticizes the GPL .
These same people like to point out how using software licensed any other way makes you a slave to the developer yet they drive cars made by someone else , wear clothes produced by someone else , and often eat food that is prepared by someone else .
Using their arguments they are just as much of a slave to the manufacturing and service industries as computer users are to software companies .
The fact of the matter is , we are all a " slave " to something .
We all enjoy having our choice but some seem to forget one very important choice ; if you do n't like something , then do n't use it .
You have that choice too .
And please do n't argue with me because I did n't make the same choice as you .
I realize that is part of human nature , but there are bigger and more important things in life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would expect the pedantic police will be out in force to correct your usage of the word "derivitive" but otherwise your point is well made.
Personnally, I don't think the problem with the GPL is the license itself.
I use it occassionally even though I prefer the less complicated BSD-style licenses.
My problem are the legions of Stalmanistas who attack anyone who criticizes the GPL.
These same people like to point out how using software licensed any other way makes you a slave to the developer yet they drive cars made by someone else, wear clothes produced by someone else, and often eat food that is prepared by someone else.
Using their arguments they are just as much of a slave to the manufacturing and service industries as computer users are to software companies.
The fact of the matter is, we are all a "slave" to something.
We all enjoy having our choice but some seem to forget one very important choice; if you don't like something, then don't use it.
You have that choice too.
And please don't argue with me because I didn't make the same choice as you.
I realize that is part of human nature, but there are bigger and more important things in life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548276</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>modmans2ndcoming</author>
	<datestamp>1261662180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hmmm<br>maybe you are using it wrong!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hmmmmaybe you are using it wrong !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hmmmmaybe you are using it wrong!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548206</id>
	<title>In what country?</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1261661400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But if Silverlight succeeds, and Linux users want to access that content, but the feature is either broken, not implemented or missing in Moonlight, those users will be in a position to contribute the code, and everyone wins.</p></div><p>
In what country? As <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1489272&amp;cid=30545802" title="slashdot.org">aztracker1 wrote</a> [slashdot.org], one feature commonly used by Silverlight sites that is missing from Moonlight is the ability to view videos subject to digital restrictions management. In the United States, only the owner of copyright in a work subject to DRM has the right to make or authorize players for that work (17 USC 1201; Universal v. Reimerdes).
</p><p>
And what users? Most individuals who don't know how to code aren't willing to donate a sum that makes up a significant fraction of what it would cost to just buy a copy of Windows to run in VirtualBox.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But if Silverlight succeeds , and Linux users want to access that content , but the feature is either broken , not implemented or missing in Moonlight , those users will be in a position to contribute the code , and everyone wins .
In what country ?
As aztracker1 wrote [ slashdot.org ] , one feature commonly used by Silverlight sites that is missing from Moonlight is the ability to view videos subject to digital restrictions management .
In the United States , only the owner of copyright in a work subject to DRM has the right to make or authorize players for that work ( 17 USC 1201 ; Universal v. Reimerdes ) . And what users ?
Most individuals who do n't know how to code are n't willing to donate a sum that makes up a significant fraction of what it would cost to just buy a copy of Windows to run in VirtualBox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But if Silverlight succeeds, and Linux users want to access that content, but the feature is either broken, not implemented or missing in Moonlight, those users will be in a position to contribute the code, and everyone wins.
In what country?
As aztracker1 wrote [slashdot.org], one feature commonly used by Silverlight sites that is missing from Moonlight is the ability to view videos subject to digital restrictions management.
In the United States, only the owner of copyright in a work subject to DRM has the right to make or authorize players for that work (17 USC 1201; Universal v. Reimerdes).

And what users?
Most individuals who don't know how to code aren't willing to donate a sum that makes up a significant fraction of what it would cost to just buy a copy of Windows to run in VirtualBox.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261680120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL</p></div></blockquote><p>You mean built on things like TCP/IP (BSD 4-clause) and Unix (ATT License) that enabled communication between networks?</p><p>Or like sendmail (BSD Licensed) that facilitated adoption of user@example.com email addresses, instead of the dominant <i>mixed!bang!and!right\%associative!email</i> addresses and the X.400 <i>C=US;A=IBMX400;P=EMAIL;G=firstname;S=lastname;O=engineering;OU=email;OU=internet-connectivity</i> style of addresses?</p><p>Or like Usenet (various parts under various BSD licenses) that facilitated the exchange of information, software, and porn before the web even existed? The one that Linus posted his early Linux sources to?</p><p>Or like FTP (BSD license, and/or ATT License) that allowed archiving and known-distribution-points of software way before google made it easy to find things?</p><p>Or like web browsers (all derived, more or less from NCSA Mosaic) which was never open-source, but required paying license fees?</p><p>Or like web servers, like Apache, which had (has) a license that isn't GPL compatable?</p><p>Can you even name any important GPL software (other than emacs) that is in wide use, is important, and is non-derivitive of something already existing under a BSD or proprietatry license?</p><p>gcc: derivitive. Every company around provided c compilers.</p><p>linux: derivitive. Ever hear of Unix?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet was basically built on the GPL , and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPLYou mean built on things like TCP/IP ( BSD 4-clause ) and Unix ( ATT License ) that enabled communication between networks ? Or like sendmail ( BSD Licensed ) that facilitated adoption of user @ example.com email addresses , instead of the dominant mixed ! bang ! and ! right \ % associative ! email addresses and the X.400 C = US ; A = IBMX400 ; P = EMAIL ; G = firstname ; S = lastname ; O = engineering ; OU = email ; OU = internet-connectivity style of addresses ? Or like Usenet ( various parts under various BSD licenses ) that facilitated the exchange of information , software , and porn before the web even existed ?
The one that Linus posted his early Linux sources to ? Or like FTP ( BSD license , and/or ATT License ) that allowed archiving and known-distribution-points of software way before google made it easy to find things ? Or like web browsers ( all derived , more or less from NCSA Mosaic ) which was never open-source , but required paying license fees ? Or like web servers , like Apache , which had ( has ) a license that is n't GPL compatable ? Can you even name any important GPL software ( other than emacs ) that is in wide use , is important , and is non-derivitive of something already existing under a BSD or proprietatry license ? gcc : derivitive .
Every company around provided c compilers.linux : derivitive .
Ever hear of Unix ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPLYou mean built on things like TCP/IP (BSD 4-clause) and Unix (ATT License) that enabled communication between networks?Or like sendmail (BSD Licensed) that facilitated adoption of user@example.com email addresses, instead of the dominant mixed!bang!and!right\%associative!email addresses and the X.400 C=US;A=IBMX400;P=EMAIL;G=firstname;S=lastname;O=engineering;OU=email;OU=internet-connectivity style of addresses?Or like Usenet (various parts under various BSD licenses) that facilitated the exchange of information, software, and porn before the web even existed?
The one that Linus posted his early Linux sources to?Or like FTP (BSD license, and/or ATT License) that allowed archiving and known-distribution-points of software way before google made it easy to find things?Or like web browsers (all derived, more or less from NCSA Mosaic) which was never open-source, but required paying license fees?Or like web servers, like Apache, which had (has) a license that isn't GPL compatable?Can you even name any important GPL software (other than emacs) that is in wide use, is important, and is non-derivitive of something already existing under a BSD or proprietatry license?gcc: derivitive.
Every company around provided c compilers.linux: derivitive.
Ever hear of Unix?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30561872</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261909380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's the end of FOSS.   My experience with Windows programmers is that there are two groups:  One is the C programmer who tries to reinvent everything.  AES256, give them a weekend and their have their own encryption method.  And, because they are a C programmer, they automatically know how to program any language that uses that syntax.  These are the Java programmers that complain about the requirement to use classes in java.</p><p>The second type of Windows programmer waits for Microsoft to release something they can use.   These are the majority of Windows programmers.  Either they're afraid to use something not Microsoft or don't understand FOSS.  They lack the ability to research options because with Microsoft, they've never had to .   Webserver:IIS.  Database: SQL Server.  Web application server: IIS.  Spring.NET, nAnt, are nice, but not needed and will be over looked.</p><p>With Mono, these will be the majority of Linux programmers (if they can get past using file permissions).  When Mono can't run something they need to run, Microsoft support will say  to run it on Windows.  It will run on Windows and the reputation of Linux, not Mono, will suffer.</p><p>So while there's not much for an existing Linux programmer or a java programmer, there's plenty for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET programmers and those businesses mistakenly thinking that Mono will save them from buying Windows licenses.</p><p>Mono is the end of FOSS not because it's not FOSS.  It's because it re-enforces the MS ways of thinking about software.  It's my opinion that we're truly near the end of a beautiful time in software development.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's the end of FOSS .
My experience with Windows programmers is that there are two groups : One is the C programmer who tries to reinvent everything .
AES256 , give them a weekend and their have their own encryption method .
And , because they are a C programmer , they automatically know how to program any language that uses that syntax .
These are the Java programmers that complain about the requirement to use classes in java.The second type of Windows programmer waits for Microsoft to release something they can use .
These are the majority of Windows programmers .
Either they 're afraid to use something not Microsoft or do n't understand FOSS .
They lack the ability to research options because with Microsoft , they 've never had to .
Webserver : IIS. Database : SQL Server .
Web application server : IIS .
Spring.NET , nAnt , are nice , but not needed and will be over looked.With Mono , these will be the majority of Linux programmers ( if they can get past using file permissions ) .
When Mono ca n't run something they need to run , Microsoft support will say to run it on Windows .
It will run on Windows and the reputation of Linux , not Mono , will suffer.So while there 's not much for an existing Linux programmer or a java programmer , there 's plenty for .NET programmers and those businesses mistakenly thinking that Mono will save them from buying Windows licenses.Mono is the end of FOSS not because it 's not FOSS .
It 's because it re-enforces the MS ways of thinking about software .
It 's my opinion that we 're truly near the end of a beautiful time in software development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's the end of FOSS.
My experience with Windows programmers is that there are two groups:  One is the C programmer who tries to reinvent everything.
AES256, give them a weekend and their have their own encryption method.
And, because they are a C programmer, they automatically know how to program any language that uses that syntax.
These are the Java programmers that complain about the requirement to use classes in java.The second type of Windows programmer waits for Microsoft to release something they can use.
These are the majority of Windows programmers.
Either they're afraid to use something not Microsoft or don't understand FOSS.
They lack the ability to research options because with Microsoft, they've never had to .
Webserver:IIS.  Database: SQL Server.
Web application server: IIS.
Spring.NET, nAnt, are nice, but not needed and will be over looked.With Mono, these will be the majority of Linux programmers (if they can get past using file permissions).
When Mono can't run something they need to run, Microsoft support will say  to run it on Windows.
It will run on Windows and the reputation of Linux, not Mono, will suffer.So while there's not much for an existing Linux programmer or a java programmer, there's plenty for .NET programmers and those businesses mistakenly thinking that Mono will save them from buying Windows licenses.Mono is the end of FOSS not because it's not FOSS.
It's because it re-enforces the MS ways of thinking about software.
It's my opinion that we're truly near the end of a beautiful time in software development.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545692</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>grotgrot</author>
	<datestamp>1261681920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.</p></div></blockquote><p>Exactly which planet are you referring to, because it isn't this one.  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU\_General\_Public\_License#Version\_1" title="wikipedia.org">GPL v1</a> [wikipedia.org] is from 1989.  Depending on exactly what you want to count as "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet#History" title="wikipedia.org">The Internet</a> [wikipedia.org]" you can put the start date as early as 1969 or as late as 1983.  Commercialization and ISPs arrived in 1988 in the US.  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisco#Corporate\_history" title="wikipedia.org">Cisco</a> [wikipedia.org] provided many of the routers used (started 1984).  BSD was the main OS used for TCP/IP development and research.  BBN had the "reference implementation".  Every single one of these things predates the GPL.  The BSD TCP/IP stack was ported to many other platforms, including Windows.  One thing is categorically certain - the Internet was not built on the GPL.  If anything it was built on BSD licensed software.</p><blockquote><div><p>For one thing, making you pay for all of our code you are secretly using for free.</p></div></blockquote><p>The GPL is not and has never been about price.  It is about freedom to share, modify and use.  You can charge whatever you want.  You can even charge people a small reasonable fee to get the source code.  It also depends on copyright law.  Someone "secretly using" anyone's code without permission is violating copyright.</p><blockquote><div><p>I for one have had enough of the whining about the GPL and how restrictive it is.</p></div></blockquote><p>The GPL is restrictive because you cannot change the terms under which the code can be redistributed.  It also applies to the whole program.  For example if you add one line of GPL code to a 20 million line program then the whole program has to become GPL compatible.  Note I use the GPL for most of my stuff and consider that the cost if you want to use my code.  But it certainly is more restrictive.  There is the LGPL which mitigates this but its use is discouraged.</p><blockquote><div><p>It seems to me, its only restrictions is you can't rip people off.</p></div></blockquote><p>"Ripping people off" is usually a financial thing.  Google have built a multi-billion dollar empire using lots of other people's GPL code (eg Linux kernel) and have not paid them.  The GPL allows you to use GPL code within a company and providing you do not distribute outside of the company you can use code as you see fit, so the original author gets "ripped off".</p><p>Your view of the GPL is just plain wrong.  It is about freedom and the restrictions are largely that you have to provide the same freedoms on the code you receive to others if you pass the code or derivatives on to others.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet was basically built on the GPL , and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.Exactly which planet are you referring to , because it is n't this one .
GPL v1 [ wikipedia.org ] is from 1989 .
Depending on exactly what you want to count as " The Internet [ wikipedia.org ] " you can put the start date as early as 1969 or as late as 1983 .
Commercialization and ISPs arrived in 1988 in the US .
Cisco [ wikipedia.org ] provided many of the routers used ( started 1984 ) .
BSD was the main OS used for TCP/IP development and research .
BBN had the " reference implementation " .
Every single one of these things predates the GPL .
The BSD TCP/IP stack was ported to many other platforms , including Windows .
One thing is categorically certain - the Internet was not built on the GPL .
If anything it was built on BSD licensed software.For one thing , making you pay for all of our code you are secretly using for free.The GPL is not and has never been about price .
It is about freedom to share , modify and use .
You can charge whatever you want .
You can even charge people a small reasonable fee to get the source code .
It also depends on copyright law .
Someone " secretly using " anyone 's code without permission is violating copyright.I for one have had enough of the whining about the GPL and how restrictive it is.The GPL is restrictive because you can not change the terms under which the code can be redistributed .
It also applies to the whole program .
For example if you add one line of GPL code to a 20 million line program then the whole program has to become GPL compatible .
Note I use the GPL for most of my stuff and consider that the cost if you want to use my code .
But it certainly is more restrictive .
There is the LGPL which mitigates this but its use is discouraged.It seems to me , its only restrictions is you ca n't rip people off .
" Ripping people off " is usually a financial thing .
Google have built a multi-billion dollar empire using lots of other people 's GPL code ( eg Linux kernel ) and have not paid them .
The GPL allows you to use GPL code within a company and providing you do not distribute outside of the company you can use code as you see fit , so the original author gets " ripped off " .Your view of the GPL is just plain wrong .
It is about freedom and the restrictions are largely that you have to provide the same freedoms on the code you receive to others if you pass the code or derivatives on to others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet was basically built on the GPL, and most of the code that makes it go was built using the GPL.Exactly which planet are you referring to, because it isn't this one.
GPL v1 [wikipedia.org] is from 1989.
Depending on exactly what you want to count as "The Internet [wikipedia.org]" you can put the start date as early as 1969 or as late as 1983.
Commercialization and ISPs arrived in 1988 in the US.
Cisco [wikipedia.org] provided many of the routers used (started 1984).
BSD was the main OS used for TCP/IP development and research.
BBN had the "reference implementation".
Every single one of these things predates the GPL.
The BSD TCP/IP stack was ported to many other platforms, including Windows.
One thing is categorically certain - the Internet was not built on the GPL.
If anything it was built on BSD licensed software.For one thing, making you pay for all of our code you are secretly using for free.The GPL is not and has never been about price.
It is about freedom to share, modify and use.
You can charge whatever you want.
You can even charge people a small reasonable fee to get the source code.
It also depends on copyright law.
Someone "secretly using" anyone's code without permission is violating copyright.I for one have had enough of the whining about the GPL and how restrictive it is.The GPL is restrictive because you cannot change the terms under which the code can be redistributed.
It also applies to the whole program.
For example if you add one line of GPL code to a 20 million line program then the whole program has to become GPL compatible.
Note I use the GPL for most of my stuff and consider that the cost if you want to use my code.
But it certainly is more restrictive.
There is the LGPL which mitigates this but its use is discouraged.It seems to me, its only restrictions is you can't rip people off.
"Ripping people off" is usually a financial thing.
Google have built a multi-billion dollar empire using lots of other people's GPL code (eg Linux kernel) and have not paid them.
The GPL allows you to use GPL code within a company and providing you do not distribute outside of the company you can use code as you see fit, so the original author gets "ripped off".Your view of the GPL is just plain wrong.
It is about freedom and the restrictions are largely that you have to provide the same freedoms on the code you receive to others if you pass the code or derivatives on to others.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551254</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>miguel</author>
	<datestamp>1261762080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps you need to read the GPL FAQ:</p><p><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins" title="gnu.org">http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins</a> [gnu.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps you need to read the GPL FAQ : http : //www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html # GPLAndPlugins [ gnu.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps you need to read the GPL FAQ:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins [gnu.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545738</id>
	<title>Re:Mono Blows (hint, where's FW 3.5)</title>
	<author>aztracker1</author>
	<datestamp>1261682160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WPF isn't a language feature, neither are WF, WCF or the enterprise libraries.  They are frameworks bound on top of the platform/language.  LINQ is there, also there is DbLINQ, Linq to NHibernate+ Fluent, and IIRC you can use Entity under mono, not that I plan to.  If you're going to develop in a framework to deploy to non-windows servers, why would you support a database framework that only runs on windows (MS SQL Server)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>WPF is n't a language feature , neither are WF , WCF or the enterprise libraries .
They are frameworks bound on top of the platform/language .
LINQ is there , also there is DbLINQ , Linq to NHibernate + Fluent , and IIRC you can use Entity under mono , not that I plan to .
If you 're going to develop in a framework to deploy to non-windows servers , why would you support a database framework that only runs on windows ( MS SQL Server ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WPF isn't a language feature, neither are WF, WCF or the enterprise libraries.
They are frameworks bound on top of the platform/language.
LINQ is there, also there is DbLINQ, Linq to NHibernate+ Fluent, and IIRC you can use Entity under mono, not that I plan to.
If you're going to develop in a framework to deploy to non-windows servers, why would you support a database framework that only runs on windows (MS SQL Server)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545724</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>Radhruin</author>
	<datestamp>1261682100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And get rid of Do? I don't think so. You can pry Do and docky from my cold, dead hands!</htmltext>
<tokenext>And get rid of Do ?
I do n't think so .
You can pry Do and docky from my cold , dead hands !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And get rid of Do?
I don't think so.
You can pry Do and docky from my cold, dead hands!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508</id>
	<title>Eternal game of catch-up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261674480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>By the time Mono finishes compatibility with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET Framework 3.5, Microsoft will have finished Visual Studio 2010 and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET Framework 4.0. Likewise, Moonlight is perpetually a version behind Silverlight, rendering it unable to view actual web sites that use Silverlight.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By the time Mono finishes compatibility with .NET Framework 3.5 , Microsoft will have finished Visual Studio 2010 and .NET Framework 4.0 .
Likewise , Moonlight is perpetually a version behind Silverlight , rendering it unable to view actual web sites that use Silverlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By the time Mono finishes compatibility with .NET Framework 3.5, Microsoft will have finished Visual Studio 2010 and .NET Framework 4.0.
Likewise, Moonlight is perpetually a version behind Silverlight, rendering it unable to view actual web sites that use Silverlight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545356</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Logger</author>
	<datestamp>1261679700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You would also probably refuse a cure for cancer if it was invented by Microsoft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You would also probably refuse a cure for cancer if it was invented by Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You would also probably refuse a cure for cancer if it was invented by Microsoft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546744</id>
	<title>Pecunia non olet.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261647420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you going to reject Windows because M$ made it?</p><p>If not, why not use Windows and be completely happy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you going to reject Windows because M $ made it ? If not , why not use Windows and be completely happy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you going to reject Windows because M$ made it?If not, why not use Windows and be completely happy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545824</id>
	<title>Re:A Prelude to Charges...</title>
	<author>aztracker1</author>
	<datestamp>1261682700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is only regarding MonoDevelop,  Mono itself was already LGPL.   The reason for this change is to be able to include non-GPL based plugins to the toolchain.  Or perhaps you could name an IDE that is as, or more functional that is GPL (not LGPL) licensed?  Most IDEs are licensed in such a way to allow for plugins under other licenses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is only regarding MonoDevelop , Mono itself was already LGPL .
The reason for this change is to be able to include non-GPL based plugins to the toolchain .
Or perhaps you could name an IDE that is as , or more functional that is GPL ( not LGPL ) licensed ?
Most IDEs are licensed in such a way to allow for plugins under other licenses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is only regarding MonoDevelop,  Mono itself was already LGPL.
The reason for this change is to be able to include non-GPL based plugins to the toolchain.
Or perhaps you could name an IDE that is as, or more functional that is GPL (not LGPL) licensed?
Most IDEs are licensed in such a way to allow for plugins under other licenses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545264</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261679160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We removed the GPL code in MonoDevelop for a couple of reasons:</p><p>(a) to allow it to become a platform that third-party plugin and add-in developers can target.</p></div><p>Bullshit. By your logic, it's impossible to load proprietary binary modules in the GPLed Linux kernel. Linus <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux\_kernel#Loadable\_kernel\_modules\_and\_firmware" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">specifically said</a> [wikipedia.org] he believes that kernel modules using only a limited, "public" subset of the kernel interfaces can sometimes be non-derived works, thus allowing some binary-only drivers and other LKMs that are not licensed under the GPL.</p><p>So you contend that the GPL won't allow proprietary plugins in a comparatively tiny project like MonoDevelop (and presumably that you couldn't <em>possibly</em> explicitly grant permission allowing them), but anyone with an Nvidia graphics card can run the closed source drivers under Linux.</p><p>Yeah.</p><p>Dude, seriously. Just give us the real reasons and let the chips fall where they may. Don't insult us with trivially refuted explanations and expect everyone to dance away happily amidst rainbows and unicorns.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We removed the GPL code in MonoDevelop for a couple of reasons : ( a ) to allow it to become a platform that third-party plugin and add-in developers can target.Bullshit .
By your logic , it 's impossible to load proprietary binary modules in the GPLed Linux kernel .
Linus specifically said [ wikipedia.org ] he believes that kernel modules using only a limited , " public " subset of the kernel interfaces can sometimes be non-derived works , thus allowing some binary-only drivers and other LKMs that are not licensed under the GPL.So you contend that the GPL wo n't allow proprietary plugins in a comparatively tiny project like MonoDevelop ( and presumably that you could n't possibly explicitly grant permission allowing them ) , but anyone with an Nvidia graphics card can run the closed source drivers under Linux.Yeah.Dude , seriously .
Just give us the real reasons and let the chips fall where they may .
Do n't insult us with trivially refuted explanations and expect everyone to dance away happily amidst rainbows and unicorns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We removed the GPL code in MonoDevelop for a couple of reasons:(a) to allow it to become a platform that third-party plugin and add-in developers can target.Bullshit.
By your logic, it's impossible to load proprietary binary modules in the GPLed Linux kernel.
Linus specifically said [wikipedia.org] he believes that kernel modules using only a limited, "public" subset of the kernel interfaces can sometimes be non-derived works, thus allowing some binary-only drivers and other LKMs that are not licensed under the GPL.So you contend that the GPL won't allow proprietary plugins in a comparatively tiny project like MonoDevelop (and presumably that you couldn't possibly explicitly grant permission allowing them), but anyone with an Nvidia graphics card can run the closed source drivers under Linux.Yeah.Dude, seriously.
Just give us the real reasons and let the chips fall where they may.
Don't insult us with trivially refuted explanations and expect everyone to dance away happily amidst rainbows and unicorns.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547744</id>
	<title>Obviously the wrong license</title>
	<author>Splintercat</author>
	<datestamp>1261656240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Should have gone with the WTFPL.</p><p>(Actually I am curious as to what a large project under WTFPL would look like.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should have gone with the WTFPL .
( Actually I am curious as to what a large project under WTFPL would look like .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Should have gone with the WTFPL.
(Actually I am curious as to what a large project under WTFPL would look like.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547410</id>
	<title>Re:Now for business use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261653660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Running" linux has little to do with the GPL, when I download and run a linux distro I never have to read the GPL or anything. What's dangerous is for companies to use GPL code, they avoid it for good reason.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Running " linux has little to do with the GPL , when I download and run a linux distro I never have to read the GPL or anything .
What 's dangerous is for companies to use GPL code , they avoid it for good reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Running" linux has little to do with the GPL, when I download and run a linux distro I never have to read the GPL or anything.
What's dangerous is for companies to use GPL code, they avoid it for good reason.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546024</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261684080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project?</p></div><p>No, why would it?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And can anyone tell me, since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL</p></div><p>How about you tell me why having it under GPL will attract the developers being targeted here, who are obviously not the GPL fundie types. Keeping it under GPL only serves to cater to the foss devs who won't touch anything that isn't GPL'ed already, who constantly chastise both Miguel and Mono. Why bother catering to them anymore? Those who're interested can contribute to dotGNU - except noone does, because despite the 'omgomgomg not gpl' attitude, none of the people comp[laining either give two shits or even contribute to or even use mono, or monodebelop to begin with.</p><p>After that whole Gnote fiasco, and 'blah blah blah mono is evil, blah blah mono-trap (just like the java trap, right? Right?)" bollocks, this much should have been expected.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>alleged impending patent sword hovering over the Mono users' heads, what exactly is there to attract people to adopt it as their developing platform?</p></div><p>What alleged patent sword? Haven't you heard of the (legally binding) community promise? Of course, even if there were no (legally binding) community promise, that doesn't stop anyone from developing or using Wine (which has potential infringement written all over it), does it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project ? No , why would it ? And can anyone tell me , since this fundamentalist stance against the GPLHow about you tell me why having it under GPL will attract the developers being targeted here , who are obviously not the GPL fundie types .
Keeping it under GPL only serves to cater to the foss devs who wo n't touch anything that is n't GPL'ed already , who constantly chastise both Miguel and Mono .
Why bother catering to them anymore ?
Those who 're interested can contribute to dotGNU - except noone does , because despite the 'omgomgomg not gpl ' attitude , none of the people comp [ laining either give two shits or even contribute to or even use mono , or monodebelop to begin with.After that whole Gnote fiasco , and 'blah blah blah mono is evil , blah blah mono-trap ( just like the java trap , right ?
Right ? ) " bollocks , this much should have been expected.alleged impending patent sword hovering over the Mono users ' heads , what exactly is there to attract people to adopt it as their developing platform ? What alleged patent sword ?
Have n't you heard of the ( legally binding ) community promise ?
Of course , even if there were no ( legally binding ) community promise , that does n't stop anyone from developing or using Wine ( which has potential infringement written all over it ) , does it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project?No, why would it?And can anyone tell me, since this fundamentalist stance against the GPLHow about you tell me why having it under GPL will attract the developers being targeted here, who are obviously not the GPL fundie types.
Keeping it under GPL only serves to cater to the foss devs who won't touch anything that isn't GPL'ed already, who constantly chastise both Miguel and Mono.
Why bother catering to them anymore?
Those who're interested can contribute to dotGNU - except noone does, because despite the 'omgomgomg not gpl' attitude, none of the people comp[laining either give two shits or even contribute to or even use mono, or monodebelop to begin with.After that whole Gnote fiasco, and 'blah blah blah mono is evil, blah blah mono-trap (just like the java trap, right?
Right?)" bollocks, this much should have been expected.alleged impending patent sword hovering over the Mono users' heads, what exactly is there to attract people to adopt it as their developing platform?What alleged patent sword?
Haven't you heard of the (legally binding) community promise?
Of course, even if there were no (legally binding) community promise, that doesn't stop anyone from developing or using Wine (which has potential infringement written all over it), does it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547900</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261657740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're wasting your time, you can't change religious beliefs with facts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're wasting your time , you ca n't change religious beliefs with facts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're wasting your time, you can't change religious beliefs with facts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544854</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1261676460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>MS does free (but not open) versions of its dev tools already, and frankly if you're using Mono you're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a *nix dev anyway.</p></div><p>Even a primarily Windows shop that uses Mono as a simple way to port its<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET apps might still use MonoDevelop as a GUI debugger.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>MS does free ( but not open ) versions of its dev tools already , and frankly if you 're using Mono you 're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a * nix dev anyway.Even a primarily Windows shop that uses Mono as a simple way to port its .NET apps might still use MonoDevelop as a GUI debugger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS does free (but not open) versions of its dev tools already, and frankly if you're using Mono you're probably an MS guy who wants his stuff to work on linux rather than a *nix dev anyway.Even a primarily Windows shop that uses Mono as a simple way to port its .NET apps might still use MonoDevelop as a GUI debugger.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551478</id>
	<title>Re:Now for business use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261764120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because most business using Linux are not writing Linux OS code, you idiot!  They don't run the risk of being sued due to a sloppy programmer mistake and having to release all their code to their competitors.</p><p>Which isn't at all what this article is about, anyway.  Way to miss the point betterunixthanunix.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because most business using Linux are not writing Linux OS code , you idiot !
They do n't run the risk of being sued due to a sloppy programmer mistake and having to release all their code to their competitors.Which is n't at all what this article is about , anyway .
Way to miss the point betterunixthanunix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because most business using Linux are not writing Linux OS code, you idiot!
They don't run the risk of being sued due to a sloppy programmer mistake and having to release all their code to their competitors.Which isn't at all what this article is about, anyway.
Way to miss the point betterunixthanunix.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545138</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261678260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are such a horrible person.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are such a horrible person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are such a horrible person.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544378</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't Miguel just go to work for Microsof</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1261673580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes the world is centered around client side applications...</p><p>Mono strength is for portability across server side applications.  The problem is not Mono,  it is the fact the GPLv3 is too strict.  It is not necessarily any point is bad but all of them together makes it too strict.</p><p>The GPL is an attempt to push an Ideal, not necessarily good policy...</p><p>I wouldn't be surprised as knowledge about open source increases that more and more pressure to not be GPL will come up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes the world is centered around client side applications...Mono strength is for portability across server side applications .
The problem is not Mono , it is the fact the GPLv3 is too strict .
It is not necessarily any point is bad but all of them together makes it too strict.The GPL is an attempt to push an Ideal , not necessarily good policy...I would n't be surprised as knowledge about open source increases that more and more pressure to not be GPL will come up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes the world is centered around client side applications...Mono strength is for portability across server side applications.
The problem is not Mono,  it is the fact the GPLv3 is too strict.
It is not necessarily any point is bad but all of them together makes it too strict.The GPL is an attempt to push an Ideal, not necessarily good policy...I wouldn't be surprised as knowledge about open source increases that more and more pressure to not be GPL will come up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544308</id>
	<title>Re:A Prelude to Charges...</title>
	<author>wh1pp3t</author>
	<datestamp>1261673160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think this would affect the major, commercially supported distros, such as RHEL -- their adoption to the latest/greatest in packages lags quite a bit (with good reason). Mono would have to become way more relevant in every aspect of the server and desktop. I just don't see that happening (and if it does, Novel and RedHat will have none of it).<p>Regarding the Linux users and enthusiasts, they will cut Mono off in a heartbeat. It's a very dynamic group and I suspect the developers will find a workaround or rebuild with other tools.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think this would affect the major , commercially supported distros , such as RHEL -- their adoption to the latest/greatest in packages lags quite a bit ( with good reason ) .
Mono would have to become way more relevant in every aspect of the server and desktop .
I just do n't see that happening ( and if it does , Novel and RedHat will have none of it ) .Regarding the Linux users and enthusiasts , they will cut Mono off in a heartbeat .
It 's a very dynamic group and I suspect the developers will find a workaround or rebuild with other tools .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think this would affect the major, commercially supported distros, such as RHEL -- their adoption to the latest/greatest in packages lags quite a bit (with good reason).
Mono would have to become way more relevant in every aspect of the server and desktop.
I just don't see that happening (and if it does, Novel and RedHat will have none of it).Regarding the Linux users and enthusiasts, they will cut Mono off in a heartbeat.
It's a very dynamic group and I suspect the developers will find a workaround or rebuild with other tools.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30552034</id>
	<title>Idea #110: No Mono by default in Ubuntu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261771440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/110/" title="ubuntu.com" rel="nofollow">http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/110/</a> [ubuntu.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/110/ [ ubuntu.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/110/ [ubuntu.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</id>
	<title>Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261672380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project? And can anyone tell me, since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL and the alleged impending patent sword hovering over the Mono users' heads, what exactly is there to attract people to adopt it as their developing platform?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project ?
And can anyone tell me , since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL and the alleged impending patent sword hovering over the Mono users ' heads , what exactly is there to attract people to adopt it as their developing platform ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project?
And can anyone tell me, since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL and the alleged impending patent sword hovering over the Mono users' heads, what exactly is there to attract people to adopt it as their developing platform?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549808</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261732920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Awww. The little boy thinks hes all grown up now. You are too cute, kid.</p><p>Whose a good boy? Whose a good boy? You are !</p><p>Here's a cookie !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Awww .
The little boy thinks hes all grown up now .
You are too cute , kid.Whose a good boy ?
Whose a good boy ?
You are ! Here 's a cookie !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Awww.
The little boy thinks hes all grown up now.
You are too cute, kid.Whose a good boy?
Whose a good boy?
You are !Here's a cookie !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260</id>
	<title>Re:I think it's funny</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261672800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are up to 3, and have a lot of 3.5 finished, but why let facts get in the way</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are up to 3 , and have a lot of 3.5 finished , but why let facts get in the way</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are up to 3, and have a lot of 3.5 finished, but why let facts get in the way</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547334</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1261652940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project? And can anyone tell me, since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL[...]</p></div><p>What the heck are you talking about? First of all, the headline, summary, and cited article all make it clear this is about the license for MonoDevelop, not the license for Mono, so you are starting off massively confused.</p><p>Second, what fundamentalist stance against GPL? MonoDevelop is an IDE, with plugin support. It makes sense to avoid making it GPL, so that plug-in authors have the maximal flexibility in their choice of license. This too is clear from the summary and article. This is how other major open source IDEs are licensed. Do you think Eclipse, for example, shows that IBM has a fundamentalist stance against the GPL?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project ?
And can anyone tell me , since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL [ ... ] What the heck are you talking about ?
First of all , the headline , summary , and cited article all make it clear this is about the license for MonoDevelop , not the license for Mono , so you are starting off massively confused.Second , what fundamentalist stance against GPL ?
MonoDevelop is an IDE , with plugin support .
It makes sense to avoid making it GPL , so that plug-in authors have the maximal flexibility in their choice of license .
This too is clear from the summary and article .
This is how other major open source IDEs are licensed .
Do you think Eclipse , for example , shows that IBM has a fundamentalist stance against the GPL ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this sign the closing of the Mono project?
And can anyone tell me, since this fundamentalist stance against the GPL[...]What the heck are you talking about?
First of all, the headline, summary, and cited article all make it clear this is about the license for MonoDevelop, not the license for Mono, so you are starting off massively confused.Second, what fundamentalist stance against GPL?
MonoDevelop is an IDE, with plugin support.
It makes sense to avoid making it GPL, so that plug-in authors have the maximal flexibility in their choice of license.
This too is clear from the summary and article.
This is how other major open source IDEs are licensed.
Do you think Eclipse, for example, shows that IBM has a fundamentalist stance against the GPL?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546864</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261648320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Emacs is derivative of other text editors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Emacs is derivative of other text editors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Emacs is derivative of other text editors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549084</id>
	<title>True colors are starting to show...finally!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261675500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>miguel msfanoboi at heart that you are!</p><p>Your TRUE COLORS ARE FINALLY STARTING TO SHOW!</p><p>Well, you will be glad to know I'VE LONG AGO REMOVED AND BANNED YOUR DISEASED software from my systems.</p><p>I personally do NOT hire:</p><p>any one with ms or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net, or vb, or c#, or asp experience. Its the kiss of death! bye bye!</p><p>And since I set the IT Hiring policy, your not getting in the door either.</p><p>All the ms weenies at my place of employment before I got there know their days are NUMBERED! The herd is thinned constantly with GNU compliant employees (ALL PUNS INTENDED bad or otherwise!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) )</p><p>I personally do NOT use:</p><p>any thing thats tainted with your diseased software. I specifically ban such implementations including WINE!</p><p>I make sure that I take steps to remove and prevent the installation of your dieseased software.</p><p>Your actions and your employers actions have put them on the:</p><p>1) Unauthorized Vendor list - so Novel and SUSE are BANNED including but not limited to OpenSUSE and SLES.<br>2) Unauthorized Software list - meaning you can be TERMINATED ON THE SPOT for use and installation of software on this list.</p><p>Your geek and nerd memberships are hereby REVOKED IMMEDIATELY, and I would be very careful about any stray penquins you run accross, as the Tuxinator is out there! And YOUR THE TARGET!</p><p>There is a reason I switched to Linux, and its to AVOID ALL THINGS ms and ms related that includes c#, asp,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net, vb, win os, and any thing else they are involved in. I don't want their crap on my systems, personal or work.</p><p>To i4i: CONGRATS! ! ! ! Spend the money well! DIE ms DIE DIE! DIE!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>miguel msfanoboi at heart that you are ! Your TRUE COLORS ARE FINALLY STARTING TO SHOW ! Well , you will be glad to know I 'VE LONG AGO REMOVED AND BANNED YOUR DISEASED software from my systems.I personally do NOT hire : any one with ms or .net , or vb , or c # , or asp experience .
Its the kiss of death !
bye bye ! And since I set the IT Hiring policy , your not getting in the door either.All the ms weenies at my place of employment before I got there know their days are NUMBERED !
The herd is thinned constantly with GNU compliant employees ( ALL PUNS INTENDED bad or otherwise !
: ) ) I personally do NOT use : any thing thats tainted with your diseased software .
I specifically ban such implementations including WINE ! I make sure that I take steps to remove and prevent the installation of your dieseased software.Your actions and your employers actions have put them on the : 1 ) Unauthorized Vendor list - so Novel and SUSE are BANNED including but not limited to OpenSUSE and SLES.2 ) Unauthorized Software list - meaning you can be TERMINATED ON THE SPOT for use and installation of software on this list.Your geek and nerd memberships are hereby REVOKED IMMEDIATELY , and I would be very careful about any stray penquins you run accross , as the Tuxinator is out there !
And YOUR THE TARGET ! There is a reason I switched to Linux , and its to AVOID ALL THINGS ms and ms related that includes c # , asp , .net , vb , win os , and any thing else they are involved in .
I do n't want their crap on my systems , personal or work.To i4i : CONGRATS !
! !
! Spend the money well !
DIE ms DIE DIE !
DIE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>miguel msfanoboi at heart that you are!Your TRUE COLORS ARE FINALLY STARTING TO SHOW!Well, you will be glad to know I'VE LONG AGO REMOVED AND BANNED YOUR DISEASED software from my systems.I personally do NOT hire:any one with ms or .net, or vb, or c#, or asp experience.
Its the kiss of death!
bye bye!And since I set the IT Hiring policy, your not getting in the door either.All the ms weenies at my place of employment before I got there know their days are NUMBERED!
The herd is thinned constantly with GNU compliant employees (ALL PUNS INTENDED bad or otherwise!
:) )I personally do NOT use:any thing thats tainted with your diseased software.
I specifically ban such implementations including WINE!I make sure that I take steps to remove and prevent the installation of your dieseased software.Your actions and your employers actions have put them on the:1) Unauthorized Vendor list - so Novel and SUSE are BANNED including but not limited to OpenSUSE and SLES.2) Unauthorized Software list - meaning you can be TERMINATED ON THE SPOT for use and installation of software on this list.Your geek and nerd memberships are hereby REVOKED IMMEDIATELY, and I would be very careful about any stray penquins you run accross, as the Tuxinator is out there!
And YOUR THE TARGET!There is a reason I switched to Linux, and its to AVOID ALL THINGS ms and ms related that includes c#, asp, .net, vb, win os, and any thing else they are involved in.
I don't want their crap on my systems, personal or work.To i4i: CONGRATS!
! !
! Spend the money well!
DIE ms DIE DIE!
DIE!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544964</id>
	<title>They got their priorities mixed</title>
	<author>CxDoo</author>
	<datestamp>1261677240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If mono develops last thing to do is trifle with whether it was GPLd or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If mono develops last thing to do is trifle with whether it was GPLd or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If mono develops last thing to do is trifle with whether it was GPLd or not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550752</id>
	<title>Re:Now for business use</title>
	<author>vakuona</author>
	<datestamp>1261754760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Using GPL software is not a problem. It's developing software that is based on GPL software where companies run into trouble at time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Using GPL software is not a problem .
It 's developing software that is based on GPL software where companies run into trouble at time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using GPL software is not a problem.
It's developing software that is based on GPL software where companies run into trouble at time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545926</id>
	<title>Re:Removing the GPL code.</title>
	<author>MasterOfMagic</author>
	<datestamp>1261683300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, they're just using the LGPL.  If that bothers you, declare your copy to be GPL and follow the restrictions of the GPL, according to the LGPL:</p><blockquote><div><p>3. You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General Public<br>License instead of this License to a given copy of the Library.  To do<br>this, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, so<br>that they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, version 2,<br>instead of to this License.  (If a newer version than version 2 of the<br>ordinary GNU General Public License has appeared, then you can specify<br>that version instead if you wish.)  Do not make any other change in<br>these notices.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Once this change is made in a given copy, it is irreversible for<br>that copy, so the ordinary GNU General Public License applies to all<br>subsequent copies and derivative works made from that copy.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; This option is useful when you wish to copy part of the code of<br>the Library into a program that is not a library.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , they 're just using the LGPL .
If that bothers you , declare your copy to be GPL and follow the restrictions of the GPL , according to the LGPL : 3 .
You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General PublicLicense instead of this License to a given copy of the Library .
To dothis , you must alter all the notices that refer to this License , sothat they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License , version 2,instead of to this License .
( If a newer version than version 2 of theordinary GNU General Public License has appeared , then you can specifythat version instead if you wish .
) Do not make any other change inthese notices .
    Once this change is made in a given copy , it is irreversible forthat copy , so the ordinary GNU General Public License applies to allsubsequent copies and derivative works made from that copy .
    This option is useful when you wish to copy part of the code ofthe Library into a program that is not a library .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, they're just using the LGPL.
If that bothers you, declare your copy to be GPL and follow the restrictions of the GPL, according to the LGPL:3.
You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General PublicLicense instead of this License to a given copy of the Library.
To dothis, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, sothat they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, version 2,instead of to this License.
(If a newer version than version 2 of theordinary GNU General Public License has appeared, then you can specifythat version instead if you wish.
)  Do not make any other change inthese notices.
    Once this change is made in a given copy, it is irreversible forthat copy, so the ordinary GNU General Public License applies to allsubsequent copies and derivative works made from that copy.
    This option is useful when you wish to copy part of the code ofthe Library into a program that is not a library.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545382</id>
	<title>Hey Miguel</title>
	<author>gr8\_phk</author>
	<datestamp>1261679880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fuck you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544872</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the closing of Mono?</title>
	<author>canajin56</author>
	<datestamp>1261676580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you think everything in your Linux distribution is GPL?  Because the libraries are all LGPL, that way you can write things that link them, but aren't GPL themselves!  And gee, I wonder what in Linux is X11 licensed?  Surely not Xfree86 I hope, that would be so fundamentalist anti-GPL it would be sickening!  Here is why the GUI has to be GPL:  The FSF maintains that loading a plugin is the same as statically linking it.  So, you write a nifty program.  You release it under GPL.  But you cross license the plugin API, GPL and LGPL and MIT X11, maybe throw Mozilla in there too, I don't care.  You might think you're safe, but you're wrong.  It doesn't matter if you never see a copy of the GPL, never use a single character of GPL code.  GNU maintains you are nevertheless bound by the GPL, if you write a plugin intended to be loaded by a GPL'd program.  Sure, in this case, they didn't have to go to full-on LGPL, they could have made it GPL with plugin loading exemptions.  But I'd imagine they were so threatened by GPL zealots they they ran screaming as fast as they could.  After reading the GNU FAQ, I feel quite threatened by the FSF and GNU guys.  I've never read an FAQ that treats the reader with such contempt and hatred...they make it clear that if you DO put that plugin loading exemption in, you're no longer welcome in the Free World, and no right thinking, freedom valuing individual will ever associate with you for the rest of your life.  I can only imagine how threatening GNU and the FSF are in personal correspondence, given the seething hate in their FAQs!  I don't blame anybody for abandoning the GPL after trying to deal with them.  All for the high crime of wanting to allow people to make X11 licensed plugins for your program.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you think everything in your Linux distribution is GPL ?
Because the libraries are all LGPL , that way you can write things that link them , but are n't GPL themselves !
And gee , I wonder what in Linux is X11 licensed ?
Surely not Xfree86 I hope , that would be so fundamentalist anti-GPL it would be sickening !
Here is why the GUI has to be GPL : The FSF maintains that loading a plugin is the same as statically linking it .
So , you write a nifty program .
You release it under GPL .
But you cross license the plugin API , GPL and LGPL and MIT X11 , maybe throw Mozilla in there too , I do n't care .
You might think you 're safe , but you 're wrong .
It does n't matter if you never see a copy of the GPL , never use a single character of GPL code .
GNU maintains you are nevertheless bound by the GPL , if you write a plugin intended to be loaded by a GPL 'd program .
Sure , in this case , they did n't have to go to full-on LGPL , they could have made it GPL with plugin loading exemptions .
But I 'd imagine they were so threatened by GPL zealots they they ran screaming as fast as they could .
After reading the GNU FAQ , I feel quite threatened by the FSF and GNU guys .
I 've never read an FAQ that treats the reader with such contempt and hatred...they make it clear that if you DO put that plugin loading exemption in , you 're no longer welcome in the Free World , and no right thinking , freedom valuing individual will ever associate with you for the rest of your life .
I can only imagine how threatening GNU and the FSF are in personal correspondence , given the seething hate in their FAQs !
I do n't blame anybody for abandoning the GPL after trying to deal with them .
All for the high crime of wanting to allow people to make X11 licensed plugins for your program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you think everything in your Linux distribution is GPL?
Because the libraries are all LGPL, that way you can write things that link them, but aren't GPL themselves!
And gee, I wonder what in Linux is X11 licensed?
Surely not Xfree86 I hope, that would be so fundamentalist anti-GPL it would be sickening!
Here is why the GUI has to be GPL:  The FSF maintains that loading a plugin is the same as statically linking it.
So, you write a nifty program.
You release it under GPL.
But you cross license the plugin API, GPL and LGPL and MIT X11, maybe throw Mozilla in there too, I don't care.
You might think you're safe, but you're wrong.
It doesn't matter if you never see a copy of the GPL, never use a single character of GPL code.
GNU maintains you are nevertheless bound by the GPL, if you write a plugin intended to be loaded by a GPL'd program.
Sure, in this case, they didn't have to go to full-on LGPL, they could have made it GPL with plugin loading exemptions.
But I'd imagine they were so threatened by GPL zealots they they ran screaming as fast as they could.
After reading the GNU FAQ, I feel quite threatened by the FSF and GNU guys.
I've never read an FAQ that treats the reader with such contempt and hatred...they make it clear that if you DO put that plugin loading exemption in, you're no longer welcome in the Free World, and no right thinking, freedom valuing individual will ever associate with you for the rest of your life.
I can only imagine how threatening GNU and the FSF are in personal correspondence, given the seething hate in their FAQs!
I don't blame anybody for abandoning the GPL after trying to deal with them.
All for the high crime of wanting to allow people to make X11 licensed plugins for your program.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544712</id>
	<title>Re:Does anyone really use it?</title>
	<author>randallman</author>
	<datestamp>1261675620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're doing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, you're married to Microsoft.</p><p>In my eyes, the main thing mono has done is prove that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET is not cross platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're doing .NET , you 're married to Microsoft.In my eyes , the main thing mono has done is prove that .NET is not cross platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're doing .NET, you're married to Microsoft.In my eyes, the main thing mono has done is prove that .NET is not cross platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545324</id>
	<title>Re:Whining little babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261679460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually you are wrong.</p><p>The foundation of the populist Internet is:</p><p>NCSA/Apache.<br>Perl<br>Sendmail</p><p>Which has morphed into:</p><p>Apache<br>PHP<br>Java<br>Perl<br>Python<br>Postfix</p><p>None of which are PHP.</p><p>The closest you can get in your argument is that GCC is GPL but even that falls down because the fact that GCC is GPL is irrelevant. It is glibc that matters and it is LGPL.</p><p>The Internet was built on a foundation of interoperability. Which means open and closed source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually you are wrong.The foundation of the populist Internet is : NCSA/Apache.PerlSendmailWhich has morphed into : ApachePHPJavaPerlPythonPostfixNone of which are PHP.The closest you can get in your argument is that GCC is GPL but even that falls down because the fact that GCC is GPL is irrelevant .
It is glibc that matters and it is LGPL.The Internet was built on a foundation of interoperability .
Which means open and closed source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually you are wrong.The foundation of the populist Internet is:NCSA/Apache.PerlSendmailWhich has morphed into:ApachePHPJavaPerlPythonPostfixNone of which are PHP.The closest you can get in your argument is that GCC is GPL but even that falls down because the fact that GCC is GPL is irrelevant.
It is glibc that matters and it is LGPL.The Internet was built on a foundation of interoperability.
Which means open and closed source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30565342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545662
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30619812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30553946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30552034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30553636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545026
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30556214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30554252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30556142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30561872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_24_1340218_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546738
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544866
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544804
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545724
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547228
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546474
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546632
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551552
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30552034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30556142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544320
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544788
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30554252
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555816
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545866
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544946
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545210
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30553946
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548734
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548276
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547332
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544692
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544508
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546338
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549920
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550640
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548206
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546490
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545802
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545706
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545540
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546422
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545362
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545944
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545264
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544698
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544676
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30565342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547940
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545356
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544632
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545026
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548360
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546744
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545508
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545230
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546506
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545498
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546078
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545008
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30561872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30556214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30619812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545424
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545962
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547900
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30548948
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30546188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545738
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544400
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30553636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545418
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30549084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544564
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30551478
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547410
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30550752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30555352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30545746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_24_1340218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30544390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_24_1340218.30547536
</commentlist>
</conversation>
