5 ms·

I hope Unity3d improves their C# environment soon (maybe Roslyn will make it easier for them?). The Monodevelop that comes with Unity 4.3 (latest) is pretty bug

I hope Unity3d improves their C# environment soon (maybe Roslyn will make it easier for them?). The Monodevelop that comes with Unity 4.3 (latest) is pretty buggy.

cwyers 13y ago
MonoDevelop shouldn't be affected by this at all in the short term (although eventually MonoDevelop may get new features from this). The actual Mono runtime that comes with Unity isn't getting upgraded because of licensing issues, which as far as I can tell, is because you can't ship LGPL code on certain systems (I think the App Store license is incompatible with the LGPL, for starters).
- uvTwitch 13y ago
  Is there any option whatsoever for Unity to use future versions of Mono, or does the GPL corruption in more recent versions mean that they're legally stuck with an outdated version?
  - cwyers 13y ago
    Unity has a license from Novell for an older version of the software, which is how they can use it in places they can't use the LGPL. Xamarin sells Mono under a commercial license, but Unity apparently doesn't want to pay what Xamarin is asking for a license to the updated code.
    - shadowmint 13y ago
      Which is sad because the massive unity code base is stuck in the C# dark ages. On the other hand, mono is 'open source' so it's kind of rubbish for Xamarin to be asking license fees when they have their own (pretty rubbish) competing game stack with monogame that they have a vested interest in (not commercially, but Xamarin developers work on it). I find this sort of 'kind of open source but actually you have to pay us ahahahahaa~' thing pretty distasteful.
      - sanxiyn 13y ago
        What is distasteful about it? Unity is not open source. If Unity were open source, it could use Mono under LGPL, no problem.
        shadowmint 13y ago
        It's the 'I want a piece of your pie' thing, that I also find troubling with patents. Person A: Invents something, fails to capitalize on it. Person B: does marketing work, sells all the Monies! Person A: -__- Oh that was clever. Actually, I want some of your money please. Person B: Fuck off. <--- The correct response. If you make something and want to sell it, sell it. If you make something and give it away for free, don't come crying when someone else sells it. The 'dual license GPL' approach to software which is 'kind of free unless you sell it, in which case we'll negotiate some nice on going licensing fees' seems disingenuous to the spirit of open source (and specifically the GPL) to me.
        knocte 13y ago
        You clearly don't understand open source. Go do some reading and later come back here. Some tips: free doesn't mean "gratis", it comes from "freedom". Therefore it is normal that the GPL uses a strategy to avoid that derived works become proprietary ('proprietary' means: essentially "non-free" for the end-user, and "free" for the developer). From your comment it seems that you confuse the fact that opensource is not something that benefits the developer; it is something that benefits the end user! Don't forget that.
        seanmcdirmid 13y ago
        Does LGPL require just the release of source code for games infected with it, or do developers have to release their assets also (like art, sound, level designs, anything needed for the code to be meaningful)? If the assets aren't covered, I think Unity could go LGPL in some way.
        cwyers 13y ago
        That's not true. The LGPL explicitly allows closed-source programs to incorporate it (that's why it's the LGPL and not the GPL). The problem is that the LGPL is incompatible with certain use cases (embedded systems, I think the App Store, possibly the various consoles) so Unity can't distribute LGPL code to those platforms.
  - sanxiyn 13y ago
    Unity has an option. They can pay Xamarin. They don't want to. The end.
    - tkubacki 13y ago
      Nowadays if I needed scripting lang I would probably go with Dartlang: better license, not a clone, probably better perf, simple concurrent prog model and still syntax is familiar.
- krisgee 13y ago
  Isn't Roslyn under Apache? Or am I misunderstanding the point here?
  - cwyers 13y ago
    Unity uses the Mono runtime. Roslyn is a compiler. Mono has its own compiler, actually, which is available under either the GPL or the MIT/X11 license. If having a non-LGPL compiler was sufficient for Unity, the MIT/X11 license for the Mono compiler would have already sufficed.

I hope Unity3d improves their C# environment soon (maybe Roslyn will make it easier for them?). The Monodevelop that comes with Unity 4.3 (latest) is pretty buggy.

cwyers 13y ago

MonoDevelop shouldn't be affected by this at all in the short term (although eventually MonoDevelop may get new features from this). The actual Mono runtime that comes with Unity isn't getting upgraded because of licensing issues, which as far as I can tell, is because you can't ship LGPL code on certain systems (I think the App Store license is incompatible with the LGPL, for starters).

uvTwitch 13y ago
Is there any option whatsoever for Unity to use future versions of Mono, or does the GPL corruption in more recent versions mean that they're legally stuck with an outdated version?
- cwyers 13y ago
  Unity has a license from Novell for an older version of the software, which is how they can use it in places they can't use the LGPL. Xamarin sells Mono under a commercial license, but Unity apparently doesn't want to pay what Xamarin is asking for a license to the updated code.
  - shadowmint 13y ago
    Which is sad because the massive unity code base is stuck in the C# dark ages. On the other hand, mono is 'open source' so it's kind of rubbish for Xamarin to be asking license fees when they have their own (pretty rubbish) competing game stack with monogame that they have a vested interest in (not commercially, but Xamarin developers work on it). I find this sort of 'kind of open source but actually you have to pay us ahahahahaa~' thing pretty distasteful.
    - sanxiyn 13y ago
      What is distasteful about it? Unity is not open source. If Unity were open source, it could use Mono under LGPL, no problem.
      - shadowmint 13y ago
        It's the 'I want a piece of your pie' thing, that I also find troubling with patents. Person A: Invents something, fails to capitalize on it. Person B: does marketing work, sells all the Monies! Person A: -__- Oh that was clever. Actually, I want some of your money please. Person B: Fuck off. <--- The correct response. If you make something and want to sell it, sell it. If you make something and give it away for free, don't come crying when someone else sells it. The 'dual license GPL' approach to software which is 'kind of free unless you sell it, in which case we'll negotiate some nice on going licensing fees' seems disingenuous to the spirit of open source (and specifically the GPL) to me.
        knocte 13y ago
        You clearly don't understand open source. Go do some reading and later come back here. Some tips: free doesn't mean "gratis", it comes from "freedom". Therefore it is normal that the GPL uses a strategy to avoid that derived works become proprietary ('proprietary' means: essentially "non-free" for the end-user, and "free" for the developer). From your comment it seems that you confuse the fact that opensource is not something that benefits the developer; it is something that benefits the end user! Don't forget that.
      - seanmcdirmid 13y ago
        Does LGPL require just the release of source code for games infected with it, or do developers have to release their assets also (like art, sound, level designs, anything needed for the code to be meaningful)? If the assets aren't covered, I think Unity could go LGPL in some way.
      - cwyers 13y ago
        That's not true. The LGPL explicitly allows closed-source programs to incorporate it (that's why it's the LGPL and not the GPL). The problem is that the LGPL is incompatible with certain use cases (embedded systems, I think the App Store, possibly the various consoles) so Unity can't distribute LGPL code to those platforms.
- sanxiyn 13y ago
  Unity has an option. They can pay Xamarin. They don't want to. The end.
  - tkubacki 13y ago
    Nowadays if I needed scripting lang I would probably go with Dartlang: better license, not a clone, probably better perf, simple concurrent prog model and still syntax is familiar.
krisgee 13y ago
Isn't Roslyn under Apache? Or am I misunderstanding the point here?
- cwyers 13y ago
  Unity uses the Mono runtime. Roslyn is a compiler. Mono has its own compiler, actually, which is available under either the GPL or the MIT/X11 license. If having a non-LGPL compiler was sufficient for Unity, the MIT/X11 license for the Mono compiler would have already sufficed.