On Sun, 2004-03-28 at 22:34, Christian Costa wrote:
> IIRC for D3D, we had been discussing about setting a cvs repository at
> that time.
> Then we dropped this idea, due to merging complication.
Well, this is the sort of thing that I hope arch will help with :)
> BTW, you have forgotten to ment
Hi Mike,
IIRC for D3D, we had been discussing about setting a cvs repository at
that time.
Then we dropped this idea, due to merging complication.
Bye,
Christian
BTW, you have forgotten to mention Lionel :-)
I think a compelling argument can be made for that. While everyone knows
CVS the subse
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 14:22:44 -0500, Sam wrote:
> > This patch implements invisibleghost, deckx and decko
> > drawing modes, and improves ghost drawing mode.
> > It also includes graphics needed by these drawing modes.
>
> Hi, I'm sure you're doing the right thing but given the number of dodgy
>
Sam wrote:
This patch implements card drawing mode flag
for rounding card corners.
Sami Nopanen, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I know it was propably suggested earlier, but why don't you use (or
adapt) my cards.dll implementation for ReactOS?
http://cvs.reactos.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/reactos/lib/
--- "Gregory M. Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> o Not the best win32 support AFAIK
We already turn way to many Win32 developers off to WINE as it is.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
http://mail.yahoo.com
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:44:50 +
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another thing I'd really like to see is a move to GNU arch version control
I'm using Arch on all my own projects and I think its great. Still needs
a little polish, but its improving really quickly.
There is also a conce
On Wednesday 17 March 2004 07:44 am, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Another thing I'd really like to see is a move to GNU arch version control
>
> What do people think?
I'm using it at my new job and it's pretty dope imho. There are a few
downsides, some already have been mentioned (those--horrible--names,
On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 14:31, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> arch sure sounds interesting (except for the file naming conventions :)),
Yeah, they bug me too, but I don't think it's a big issue really.
> but before we can consider switching we *must* have infrastructure
> available that's comparable to
On March 17, 2004 8:44 am, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Another thing I'd really like to see is a move to GNU arch version control
arch sure sounds interesting (except for the file naming conventions :)),
but before we can consider switching we *must* have infrastructure
available that's comparable to the
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:15:32 +0100, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
> I am very happy to see this level of cooperation between Wine and
> Reactos at all. Remember, the linux kernel gets forked all the time,
> patches are tried out and the good ones percolate up to Linus' tree.
Perhaps Wine should start con
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 05:22:37PM -0500, Chris Morgan wrote:
> > duplicated. Sometime our developers dont want to wait on a
> > submit->modify->comit/reject->merge->submit loop of Winehq so they put
> > code in to ReactOS cvs first. Does it mean sometimes work gets
> > duplicated? Sometimes yes. I
Sam wrote:
Improvements to cards.dll based on documentation at
http://www.microsoft.com/mind/0396/games.asp.
I'm not sure if you have read this post or not but here it is.
http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2003/07/0691.html
Tom
Joerg Mayer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 12:09:24AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Can someone remind me again why we can't have GPL DLLs in the tree?
Doesn't the "call through documented interface blah blah blah not
derived work" argument cause the license for each two DLLs in Wine to be
i
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 12:09:24AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Can someone remind me again why we can't have GPL DLLs in the tree?
> Doesn't the "call through documented interface blah blah blah not
> derived work" argument cause the license for each two DLLs in Wine to be
> independant?
Ba
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I see these guys as our friends, comrades and they have to my simple
> knowledge agreed to cross licence *all* there work th the LGPL so
> *we* not them can use there hard work. I have yet to hear of a
> single incidence where *wine* code was cross licensed ba
> duplicated. Sometime our developers dont want to wait on a
> submit->modify->comit/reject->merge->submit loop of Winehq so they put
> code in to ReactOS cvs first. Does it mean sometimes work gets
> duplicated? Sometimes yes. Its going to happen. Rather by mistake, or
> design some effort will be
I'm sorry if this turns out to be a troll. That is not my intention.
Can someone remind me again why we can't have GPL DLLs in the tree?
Doesn't the "call through documented interface blah blah blah not
derived work" argument cause the license for each two DLLs in Wine to be
independant?
On 15.03.2004 23:01:56 Martin Fuchs wrote:
> Well to take up for the ReactOS folks Martin and Ge have done one hell
> of a fine job on shell32 !!
> And they have given every thing back.. Not once but twice!
> As AJ was on vacation at the time and Martin & Ge spent alot of time
> i'm sure spliti
> From: Tom
>
> Well to take up for the ReactOS folks Martin and Ge have
> done one hell of a fine job on shell32 !! And they have given
> every thing back.. Not once but twice! As AJ was on vacation
> at the time and Martin & Ge spent alot of time i'm sure
> spliting the patch up into sma
Dimitrie O Paun wrote:
Folks, my applogies, the message wasn't intended as a flame.
And my applogies for calling your post a flame when it wasn't.
I think were all friends here so... we should have fun and move on.
Sorry Dimi, if i've caused any misunderstandings!
Tom
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Tom wrote:
> To sum this up. *WE* every sigle wine user all 100,000 at the
> last estate
> should be glad that were in the company of the people at
> http:www.reactos.com
> as they are *our* friends & comrades and not someone to flame!!!
Folks, my applogies, the me
Dimitrie O Paun wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Steven Edwards wrote:
We have a cards.dll in the ReactOS tree that we wanted to merge with
Winehq but the license of the bitmaps was GPL and not LGPL. Do you want
to take a look at our implementation and see if there is anything you
can use from it
--- "Dimitrie O. Paun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Time and again, it seems that the ReactOS folks produce a lot of
> throw-away code, by keeping it in the ReactOS tree. I've lost count
> on how many times this happened in the past, don't you guys get it
> that we should work together on this stuf
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Steven Edwards wrote:
> We have a cards.dll in the ReactOS tree that we wanted to merge with
> Winehq but the license of the bitmaps was GPL and not LGPL. Do you want
> to take a look at our implementation and see if there is anything you
> can use from it?
Ti
--- Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is a clean room implementation of cards.dll.
> While it is not really an official windows system dll,
> it is almost always present, and several applications
> depend on it.
We have a cards.dll in the ReactOS tree that we wanted to mer
25 matches
Mail list logo
