On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Vitaliy Margolen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Austin English wrote:
>
> > 13120 - I'll run the test tomorrow if I can reproduce/no one has by then.
> > 13110 - no one requested a regression test. I've requested it now.
> > 13101 - not a regression
> > 13086 - not
Austin English wrote:
> On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Vitaliy Margolen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Austin English wrote:
>>
>>> 13120 - I'll run the test tomorrow if I can reproduce/no one has by then.
>>> 13110 - no one requested a regression test. I've requested it now.
>>> 13101 - not a
>> Relax the code freeze a bit and stay in RC phase for as many releases as
>> the beta phase..?
>
> That's like saying "don't do the 1.0 release yet, just keep doing
> 0.9.62, etc..."
> Not going to happen. Wine needs a release. All good open source
> projects need to release (not just make sn
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 9:48 PM, Marcel Partap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Attracting users by promising a major step forward - a finished x.0 release
> - that don't already come to wine by other means may backfire - a zillion
> useless bug reports, fed up newbies, many 'ruined' first-foss-contac
> but you might kill yourself as well. We need to do what you said, test
> Wine before releasing to the public. However, this is not possible
> given the aggressive release schedule of the project.
Why is that so? I still do not see any benefit in calling it wine 1.0 at this
time. What is th
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 10:52 PM, James McKenzie
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> > Dan Kegel wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not sure what you're angry about.
> >> None of us have that much control over exactly
> >> which way wine develops. We all scratch our own itches,
> >> an
Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> Dan Kegel wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure what you're angry about.
>> None of us have that much control over exactly
>> which way wine develops. We all scratch our own itches,
>> and it improves at its own pace.
>> What more do you want?
>>
>
> Stability. For things to c
Am Sonntag, 11. Mai 2008 05:35:15 schrieb James McKenzie:
> I agree that a D3D expert needs to fix this problem, pronto. However,
> I'm not one of them and it looks like at least one of them proposed a
> fix in the issue.
Fyi, I am terribly busy at the moment with university work, I have a bunch o
Am Montag, 12. Mai 2008 14:29:40 schrieb Vitaliy Margolen:
> Stability. For things to continue working once they get fixed. Which means
> more developers have to "support" their changes - promptly address all
> issues that result from their changes. IMHO this is the way project should
> be moving f
James McKenzie schrieb:
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>> James McKenzie wrote:
[...]
> Again, do we have enough time to test every combination of products in
> the short release to release schedule. I would say NO. However, this
> schedule is not of my doing. My saying "Release no software before
Dan Kegel wrote:
> I'm not sure what you're angry about.
> None of us have that much control over exactly
> which way wine develops. We all scratch our own itches,
> and it improves at its own pace.
> What more do you want?
Stability. For things to continue working once they get fixed. Which mean
Vitaliy wrote:
>> To get lots more people to try it and report bugs, so it can improve faster.
>This is questionable. I can point to several bug reports that have several
>dozen people reporting problems and that are still open for years. So just
>saying more bug reports results into better Wine is
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> "Vitaliy Margolen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> For most people yeah it will be a surprise. Until they hit first major
>> problem. Which will put them back into windows land. You see there are
>> much more people out there that use PCs as ... tools. Those tools
>> e
Austin English wrote:
> 13120 - I'll run the test tomorrow if I can reproduce/no one has by then.
> 13110 - no one requested a regression test. I've requested it now.
> 13101 - not a regression
> 13086 - not sure if it's always existed or a regression. I asked for
> clarification.
>
> If anyone ca
"Vitaliy Margolen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For most people yeah it will be a surprise. Until they hit first major
> problem. Which will put them back into windows land. You see there are much
> more people out there that use PCs as ... tools. Those tools either work or
> they don't. Wine j
Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> James McKenzie wrote:
>
>> There were several 'fixes' to this problem in the issue. And Stephan
>> continues to troubleshoot the problem. However, this is a VOLUNTEER
>> effort and most of us have 'real lives' to live. I would gladly work on
>> rich edit problems
Dan Kegel wrote:
> Marcel wrote:
>> i don't even see the point of a 1.0 release at this point in time.
>> This project has been a work in progress since 15 years.
>> Why the heck has it been decided to do a 'gold' release *now* anyways?
>
> To get lots more people to try it and report bugs, so it
Dan Kegel wrote:
> Marcel wrote:
>
>> i don't even see the point of a 1.0 release at this point in time.
>> This project has been a work in progress since 15 years.
>> Why the heck has it been decided to do a 'gold' release *now* anyways?
>>
>
> To get lots more people to try it and report
Marcel wrote:
> i don't even see the point of a 1.0 release at this point in time.
> This project has been a work in progress since 15 years.
> Why the heck has it been decided to do a 'gold' release *now* anyways?
To get lots more people to try it and report bugs, so it can improve faster.
And t
13120 - I'll run the test tomorrow if I can reproduce/no one has by then.
13110 - no one requested a regression test. I've requested it now.
13101 - not a regression
13086 - not sure if it's always existed or a regression. I asked for
clarification.
If anyone can identify regressions that haven't
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Zachary Goldberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I agree, and I'm of course not talking about reverting the entire
>> tree. Vitaliy has mentioned a few specific patches though (mostly in
>> d3d I think) which have
"Zachary Goldberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I agree, and I'm of course not talking about reverting the entire
> tree. Vitaliy has mentioned a few specific patches though (mostly in
> d3d I think) which have caused some noise in the gaming realm.
If Vitaliy or anybody else think a patch must
Alexandre,
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Alexandre Julliard
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Zachary Goldberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I think most of the participants in this thread thus far recognize the
>> complexity of Wine and the difficulty of the task at hand. I do
>> believe how
Alexander Dorofeyev wrote:
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>> If developer can not tell if this is a hi risk or not, then such patch
>> have to be marked as hi risk and should not be accepted while we are in
>> the code freeze. Unless number of people test this patch on different
>> hardware with diff
Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> If developer can not tell if this is a hi risk or not, then such patch
> have to be marked as hi risk and should not be accepted while we are in
> the code freeze. Unless number of people test this patch on different
> hardware with different software and verify it's fu
Tom Wickline schrieb:
> Well its not only Games, if you install office 2007 NOTHING works with RC-1!
> You have to revert back to 0.9.59 for it to work the best it ever did, then
> it's all down hill from each release forward ..As it looks Wine
> 1.0 will be a huge POS..
i don't even see th
"Zachary Goldberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think most of the participants in this thread thus far recognize the
> complexity of Wine and the difficulty of the task at hand. I do
> believe however, that Vitaliy's original arguement still stands. Are
> we working to make Wine 1.0 be the be
Alexander Dorofeyev wrote:
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>> James McKenzie wrote:
>>> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
Several latest releases introduced lots and lots of regressions to a
point that no games run as-is. Considering that we are at the code
freeze, I'd like to see all patches that
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Alexander Dorofeyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>> James McKenzie wrote:
>>> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
Several latest releases introduced lots and lots of regressions to a
point that no games run as-is. Considering that we are at th
Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> James McKenzie wrote:
>> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>>> Several latest releases introduced lots and lots of regressions to a
>>> point that no games run as-is. Considering that we are at the code
>>> freeze, I'd like to see all patches that cause regressions, and all
>>> p
2008/5/11 Tom Wickline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Well its not only Games, if you install office 2007 NOTHING works with RC-1!
> You have to revert back to 0.9.59 for it to work the best it ever did, then
> it's all down hill from each release forward ..As it looks Wine
> 1.0 will be a huge POS
Well its not only Games, if you install office 2007 NOTHING works with RC-1!
You have to revert back to 0.9.59 for it to work the best it ever did, then
it's all down hill from each release forward ..As it looks Wine
1.0 will be a huge POS..
Just my $0.02
Tom
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 9:07
James McKenzie wrote:
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>> James McKenzie wrote:
>>> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
Several latest releases introduced lots and lots of regressions to a
point that no games run as-is. Considering that we are at the code
freeze, I'd like to see all patches that caus
James McKenzie wrote:
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>> Several latest releases introduced lots and lots of regressions to a
>> point that no games run as-is. Considering that we are at the code
>> freeze, I'd like to see all patches that cause regressions, and all
>> patches that depend on them star
Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> Several latest releases introduced lots and lots of regressions to a point
> that no games run as-is. Considering that we are at the code freeze, I'd
> like to see all patches that cause regressions, and all patches that depend
> on them starting from wine-0.9.58 be rev
Several latest releases introduced lots and lots of regressions to a point
that no games run as-is. Considering that we are at the code freeze, I'd
like to see all patches that cause regressions, and all patches that depend
on them starting from wine-0.9.58 be reverted.
Also each patch to have
36 matches
Mail list logo
