On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 11:09:53AM -0500, James Hawkins wrote:
> On 10/12/07, Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Steven Edwards wrote:
> > One more issue to raise: is the reason why we have 'wine-' as the prefix
> > to avoid conflicts between different products? Th
On 10/12/07, Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Steven Edwards wrote:
> [...]
> > > gdi
> > > printing
> [...]
> > Yes I second this motion. The components should be named as simply as
> > possible. Users are going to be the ones filing the reports and
> > whoever is
On Do, 2007-10-11 at 16:32 -0600, Jesse Allen wrote:
> How about "gdi-printing" and "gdi-video"?
No.
GDI is more than printing and for printing,
you need GDI, but also much more out of GDI
Whe the bug-creator set the component to "printing", we can
change it later to the more specific component
On Do, 2007-10-11 at 14:24 -0500, James Hawkins wrote:
> > > wine-gdi-(printing) -> gdi
> >
> >
> > I vote for "printing" next to "gdi"
> >
>
> What's wrong with having a new printing component?
That was my vote above.
I asked for a "printing" component over 1 year ago,
but only "wine-gdi" wa
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Steven Edwards wrote:
[...]
> > gdi
> > printing
[...]
> Yes I second this motion. The components should be named as simply as
> possible. Users are going to be the ones filing the reports and
> whoever is doing triage is going to have to move it around if its in
> the wrong ar
On 10/11/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, because not all printing problems are gdi, and if you don't have
> gdi-printing, there's no need for gdi-video; just plain gdi works.
> The same argument goes for gdi-video. So, we should have:
>
> gdi
> printing
>
> and any bugs that are
On 10/11/07, Jesse Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/11/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/11/07, Detlef Riekenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Mi, 2007-10-10 at 15:20 -0500, James Hawkins wrote:
> > >
> > > > wine-gdi-(printing) -> gdi
> > >
> > > This is a bad I
On 10/11/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/11/07, Detlef Riekenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mi, 2007-10-10 at 15:20 -0500, James Hawkins wrote:
> >
> > > wine-gdi-(printing) -> gdi
> >
> > This is a bad Idea.
> > We have a lot of different dlls related to printing:
> >
On 10/11/07, Detlef Riekenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mi, 2007-10-10 at 15:20 -0500, James Hawkins wrote:
>
> > wine-gdi-(printing) -> gdi
>
> This is a bad Idea.
> We have a lot of different dlls related to printing:
>
> comdlg32.dll
> compstui.dll
> gdi32.dll
> localspl.dll
> printui.dll
On Mi, 2007-10-10 at 15:20 -0500, James Hawkins wrote:
> wine-gdi-(printing) -> gdi
This is a bad Idea.
We have a lot of different dlls related to printing:
comdlg32.dll
compstui.dll
gdi32.dll
localspl.dll
printui.dll
shell32.dll
wineps.drv
winspool.drv
I vote for "printing" next to "gdi"
--
On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 03:52:36PM -0500, James Hawkins wrote:
> On 10/10/07, Louis Lenders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > E.g. there is wine-quartz (one dll dlls/quartz/ ) and
> > > > wine-directx-dshow (includes dlls/{quartz,msdmo,qcap}/ ).
> >
> > Well, the common (newbie) user probably
On 10/10/07, Louis Lenders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Hawkins gmail.com> writes:
>
>
> > > Currently we have some categories that exactly fit to one dll and
> > > some categories that include multiple dlls that are related. Also
> > > there is overlap between those two. (And perhaps some t
James Hawkins gmail.com> writes:
> > Currently we have some categories that exactly fit to one dll and
> > some categories that include multiple dlls that are related. Also
> > there is overlap between those two. (And perhaps some that fit in
> > neither.)
> >
> > E.g. there is wine-quartz (one
On 10/10/07, Jan Zerebecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree the wine- prefix should be removed.
>
> Currently we have quite some categories where I don't really know
> how they are defined, so the description should be enhanced so
> there is no confusion over what goes in them.
>
> Currently we
Hi Jan,
Jan Zerebecki schreef:
> I agree the wine- prefix should be removed.
>
> Currently we have quite some categories where I don't really know
> how they are defined, so the description should be enhanced so
> there is no confusion over what goes in them.
>
> Currently we have some categories
I agree the wine- prefix should be removed.
Currently we have quite some categories where I don't really know
how they are defined, so the description should be enhanced so
there is no confusion over what goes in them.
Currently we have some categories that exactly fit to one dll and
some categor
16 matches
Mail list logo
