But you're ignoring the main thrust of my argument. Are SSL and IPv6 (to name a couple of examples) at risk of patent litigation or not?That doesn't cover everything. We have been through this already.
And if not, are you saying that Mono's core is fine, but only leaf libraries like WinForms are not?
That really doesn't matter, from a patent perspective. There's nothing preventing Microsoft from filing a patent with .NET in mind, which inadvertently can be affected by other languages doing similar things. There's only so many ways to write a garbage collector.Python and Vala were not developed by a company that has destroying Linux as an official corporate goal. That puts them in a slightly different starting place.
Actually, the funny thing is, Python or Vala would be *worse* in this scenario. Mono's core is covered under a patent grant from Microsoft - can you say the same about Python? Has anyone checked to ensure Python isn't implementing any basic object oriented framework stuff to which Microsoft have patent claims? Or any other hostile patent holders like Oracle?
The answer to both of those is "no" by the way. We just assume Python is fine, and keep using it on an assumption powered by hope and dreams.
And that's fine - because we have Free Software, and if someone comes up with a patent, then you just work around the patent. Bam, job jobbed. The kernel still exists despite patent claims against it, because as soon as vague threats get substantiated, the code in question gets changed, and the patent nullified. People don't afford the same process to Mono because it's all a bullshit excuse.
It also assumes that Mono's implementation of things would necessarily violate any .NET patents, which is a false assumption. Do I need to cite Freetype here?It provides that Microsoft has patents on some parts of .Net, meaning it is not outlandish to fear they might have patents on other parts, patents that they have not put under any sort of promise.