October 2002 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: So lets say we do it

by Dimitrie O. Paun

On October 31, 2002 03:09 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote: > Well, that maintenance would e.g. include the localization work I > suggested, having a *separate* CVS containing all localized Wine Guides, > and having automatically updated docu maintenance web pages > for every language involved. But this is probably a bit too much. I mean, yeah, would be great to have the guides localized, and what not, but that's a _lot_ of work, and we don't seem to be able to maintain the English ones, let alone other languages. Localizing the guides right now would just compound the problem by just ending up with more unmaintained documentation. What would be more productive, at this point, is a clear, and focused TODO list for the current documentation, broken down into two sections: 1. What is out of date (and needs fixing) 2. What is missing (and needs writing) Now, you being the guy that know the docs best, ..., eh, ..., maybe you can help create such a list ;) Once it's done, maybe people will start picking an item at a time, etc. What do ya say? -- Dimi.

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: So lets say we do it

by Andreas Mohr

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 03:07:15PM -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: > On October 31, 2002 03:00 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote: > > > Not yet too late for another 'Halloween' release though ;) > > > > Yep... > > > > ...next year ! ;) > > I don't want to jinx it, but at the rate we're going, we'd be > lucky to do a 1.0 'Halloween' release next year :/ Why, the current rate is avalanche-like ;) I'm growing ever more astonished about the increase in wine-patches per day... But of course you're sorta right, we're still quite far off the mark.

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: So lets say we do it

by Andreas Mohr

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 02:58:12PM -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: > On October 31, 2002 02:44 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote: > > For christ's sake, IF YOU CAN'T STAND THE DOCU, THEN *IMPROVE IT*. > > Well, that's a good point. And I did a bit, but not nearly as much > as you. > > > I did. (past tense) > > But maybe then it seems like I didn't... > > Hey, I've never complained about the work you did on the docs! Not directly, yes. > All I am saying is that the docs are, in part, out of date, > and I'm not pointing a finger at you, as it isn't your responsibility > to keep them up-to-date. *I* didn't keep the ones I wrote up-to-date, > so I don't dare point my finger at anyone :) Heh. > The docs are huge, and requite work, which should be tackled by > more than one person. No matter how much you work on them, if > you are alone, you'll always be behind. So don't take my comments > as an attack against you, the one actually working on the docs; > quite the opposite, it's a comment to the community for not helping > on the said maintenance. Well, that maintenance would e.g. include the localization work I suggested, having a *separate* CVS containing all localized Wine Guides, and having automatically updated docu maintenance web pages for every language involved. So far there still is nobody who has stepped up to the plate of implementing such a database-driven web page framework... (I could complain here again, but this time I better won't :) -- Andreas Mohr Stauferstr. 6, D-71272 Renningen, Germany Tel. +49 7159 800604 http://mohr.de.tt

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: So lets say we do it

by Dimitrie O. Paun

On October 31, 2002 03:00 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote: > > Not yet too late for another 'Halloween' release though ;) > > Yep... > > ...next year ! ;) I don't want to jinx it, but at the rate we're going, we'd be lucky to do a 1.0 'Halloween' release next year :/ -- Dimi.

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: So lets say we do it

by Andreas Mohr

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 07:08:07PM +0100, Marcus Meissner wrote: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 08:24:28AM -0800, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > > So no, I'm not going to make a general public release just yet... > > Not yet too late for another 'Halloween' release though ;) Yep... ...next year ! ;)

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: So lets say we do it

by Dimitrie O. Paun

On October 31, 2002 02:44 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote: > For christ's sake, IF YOU CAN'T STAND THE DOCU, THEN *IMPROVE IT*. Well, that's a good point. And I did a bit, but not nearly as much as you. > I did. (past tense) > But maybe then it seems like I didn't... Hey, I've never complained about the work you did on the docs! All I am saying is that the docs are, in part, out of date, and I'm not pointing a finger at you, as it isn't your responsibility to keep them up-to-date. *I* didn't keep the ones I wrote up-to-date, so I don't dare point my finger at anyone :) The docs are huge, and requite work, which should be tackled by more than one person. No matter how much you work on them, if you are alone, you'll always be behind. So don't take my comments as an attack against you, the one actually working on the docs; quite the opposite, it's a comment to the community for not helping on the said maintenance. -- Dimi.

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: So lets say we do it

by Johan Dahlin

Em Qui, 2002-10-31 às 16:38, Dimitrie O. Paun escreveu: > On October 31, 2002 01:21 pm, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > > Sometime in June, I don't have the exact date of the first release > > unfortunately. Release 0.0.2 was on June 25. > > Too far away for 0.8, too close for 1.0. Maybe 0.9, if we're lucky. > Maybe it's better to call the next version 0.9. I checked up, 0.8 is already released :) It was the last version to be released before switching to the snapshot style version numbering. (the first snapshot was released February 1994) > -- > Dimi. > -- Johan Dahlin <jdahlin(a)async.com.br>

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: Debugging advice

by Michael Wetherell

On Thursday 31 October 2002 1:53 am, Matthew Bloch wrote: > Okay, but presumably it's easier (as in not impossible!) for me to debug a > program with GDB if I'm using a elf binary as opposed to a PE binary, which > is mostly my object here. gdb does have support for PEs (since there are Windows versions of gdb). Unix builds don't usually have it compiled in, though you only need to change one line of the gdb souce to enable it, see: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&selm=6xUt8.14322%24sL6.2032145%40… gdb doesn't support any of the debugging formats used by MS tools, but you can instead compile your program with a version of gcc that targets Win32 (some GNU/LInux distros have mingw32 as a package). I made some notes about debugging threads this way here: http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2002/06/0051.html Alternatively, Eric Pouech made a gdb remote stub out of winedbg, see: http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-patches/2002/07/0080.html http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-patches/2002/07/0081.html

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: So lets say we do it

by Dimitrie O. Paun

On October 31, 2002 02:44 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote: > Gee, thanks ! > You know how many man-weeks (err, months ?) I've been putting into it, > right ? I was referring to the interface, not the content. In fact, I think the web-interface makes a disservice to the content. In fact, I am saying quite the opposite: we should bring that content to more to the front, right now it's hidden way too deep inside the site. -- Dimi.

Oct. 31, 2002

Re: So lets say we do it

by Andreas Mohr

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 01:19:33PM -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: > On October 31, 2002 11:24 am, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > > You forgot a few things here: > > Yes, and no: it was getting late, hand was all funny, > email was getting too long... :) > > > First it doesn't even start because they don't have a config file. OK, > > Hear, hear! BTW, we should move configuration out of documentation/samples Hmm, why ? Where should it be then ? Having sample config in such a directory has a pretty long tradition. One thing that comes to my mind here is Debian. > > Then they finally manage to run the installer but it > > puts stuff in RunOnce that never gets run so the app doesn't work. > > See, I wasn't even aware of that! Hmm, my problem :-\ > > Then they finally make the app run but can't print anything. And > > True. I second that (at least sometimes). > > when they ask for help they get told to fight the FAQ-O-Matic crap to > > maybe finally find an answer telling them they are an idiot. > > That FAQ-O-Matic should just be 'rm -rf'. It's crap. We either have > a carefully hand-written FAQ, or nothing at all. Gee, thanks ! You know how many man-weeks (err, months ?) I've been putting into it, right ? I guess I hereby declare that I'll stop ALL documentation work. Obviously it's not too appreciated, given the constant and very annoying whining. Not to mention that I've been constantly working "behind the fact". For christ's sake, IF YOU CAN'T STAND THE DOCU, THEN *IMPROVE IT*. I did. (past tense) But maybe then it seems like I didn't... Boy, that'll give me quite some free time for RL work... -- Andreas Mohr Stauferstr. 6, D-71272 Renningen, Germany Tel. +49 7159 800604 http://mohr.de.tt

Oct. 31, 2002