June 2009 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Include: Add fil_data.idl to describe IAMFilterData interface (resend)

by Vitaliy Margolen

Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Vitaliy Margolen <wine-patches(a)kievinfo.com> writes: > >> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ PUBLIC_IDL_H_SRCS = \ >> dxgi.idl \ >> dxgitype.idl \ >> exdisp.idl \ >> + fil_data.idl \ > > This file doesn't seem to be part of the SDK. > Strange, I found header here: Samples/Multimedia/DirectShow/Misc/Mapper/fil_data.h The thing is, that IAMFilterData interface is not describe anywhere at all, except that file. So, should I just move it into dxdiagn dir? Vitaliy.

June 29, 2009

Re: Removing active maintainers

by Rosanne DiMesio

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:56:23 +0200 Remco <remco47(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Rosanne DiMesio<dimesio(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > That would still leave the test results sitting there unprocessed for weeks, which leaves a pretty bad impression on the users who submitted them. Test results for apps without maintainers get processed by the admins within 24 hours. > > How about mailing admins after 24 hours? Maintainers are useful to > offload tasks of admins. If they are away for a while, admins just get > the mail as if there were no maintainer. If you have to remove a > maintainer every time he can't respond in 24 hours, you won't have > many left after a while. > > Remco Nobody's suggesting a 24 hour time limit for maintainers. As for emailing the admins, I know I turned off emails from the AppDB to avoid having my mailbox overwhelmed with hundreds of useless notices every day, and I doubt I'm the only one who did this. http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14755 needs to be fixed first for any solution that involves emailing admins to be viable. -- Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net>

June 29, 2009

Re: Removing active maintainers

by Remco

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Rosanne DiMesio<dimesio(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > That would still leave the test results sitting there unprocessed for weeks, which leaves a pretty bad impression on the users who submitted them. Test results for apps without maintainers get processed by the admins within 24 hours. How about mailing admins after 24 hours? Maintainers are useful to offload tasks of admins. If they are away for a while, admins just get the mail as if there were no maintainer. If you have to remove a maintainer every time he can't respond in 24 hours, you won't have many left after a while. Remco

June 29, 2009

Re: Removing active maintainers

by Rosanne DiMesio

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:19:18 +0200 Sjors Gielen <mailinglist(a)dazjorz.com> wrote: > Ken Sharp wrote: > > > > > > Dan Kegel wrote: > > > >> 3. Eight days is way too quick to remove an inactive maintainer. Six > >> months is more like it. > > > > That is far too long. After two weeks there are 100 test results > > waiting in the queue. Six months wouldn't help the users out at all. > > Their test results would disappear into a black hole. > > > > But he could be temporarily away. What about sending him a mail after 8 > days, sending him an urgent mail after two/three weeks saying "please > remove yourself if you know you're not going to handle these" and only > remove him a few weeks later. Maintainers are volunteers, they can't be > expected to spend *all* their time on appdb, they have time now and > then; unless they are, for example, on a holiday. > That would still leave the test results sitting there unprocessed for weeks, which leaves a pretty bad impression on the users who submitted them. Test results for apps without maintainers get processed by the admins within 24 hours. But you are right about temporary absences. It would be useful if there were some sort of "out of the office" flag that maintainers could check to notify admins that they'll be gone for a time, and we should process the tests reports for their apps. I also think booting the maintainer on a first offense is a bit extreme. I'd prefer a "three strikes and you're out" approach--the first two times admins have to process a maintainer's tests (after sitting there for a week) they get warnings; the third time, they're removed as maintainer, and not allowed back. But there would need to be an automatic mechanism to keep track of repeat offenders. I'm not sure how difficult that would be. BTW, nowhere on the maintainer guidelines page does it say that maintainers have to process test reports within a certain amount of time. In fact, nowhere does it say anything about them having to process test reports at all, nor does it say anything about being removed as a maintainer if they fail to fulfill their duties (which are so vague as to be unenforceable anyway). This really needs to be rectified. -- Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net>

June 29, 2009

Re: why is Kronenberg's Wine/Mac work blacklisted on winehq?

by Joerg-Cyril.Hoehle＠t-systems.com

>If there were a plain vanilla wine built on OS X IMHO, Mac Users can expect from a binary distribution something Mac-like, e.g. some kind of GUI. Another OSS project I've worked on for over a decade used to embed NeXtStep specific GUI source code. There was no GUI for any other UNIX derivative. Why not ship something that meets the OS users' expectations? What I like about Kronenberg's distribution is that GUI and Wine are (at least internally) separated. /Volumes/Darwine/Darwine/Contents.../bin/wine winecfg|regedit|xyz.exe just works like I'm used to on Linux. Actually, I've never used the GUI to start something beside winecfg. Maybe one could turn this into a requirement for a more or less official Wine distribution? + Do not hide or stand in the way of a plain "wine foo.exe". Rather than that, document it! BTW, I now understand that this WineHelper GUI originates from the defunct Darwine project. I'd recommend removing from this GUI's preferences menu anything that's settable in winecfg today (...most of "preferences"!). (AFAIK, winecfg is only 6 years old, Linux Wine users used to edit configuration files before that GUI was created, so back then, this Mac preferences GUI was a real benefit to users). Regards, Jörg Höhle

June 29, 2009

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Include: Add fil_data.idl to describe IAMFilterData interface (resend)

by Alexandre Julliard

Vitaliy Margolen <wine-patches(a)kievinfo.com> writes: > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ PUBLIC_IDL_H_SRCS = \ > dxgi.idl \ > dxgitype.idl \ > exdisp.idl \ > + fil_data.idl \ This file doesn't seem to be part of the SDK. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

June 29, 2009

Re: Removing active maintainers

by Sjors Gielen

Ken Sharp wrote: > > > Dan Kegel wrote: > >> 3. Eight days is way too quick to remove an inactive maintainer. Six >> months is more like it. > > That is far too long. After two weeks there are 100 test results > waiting in the queue. Six months wouldn't help the users out at all. > Their test results would disappear into a black hole. > But he could be temporarily away. What about sending him a mail after 8 days, sending him an urgent mail after two/three weeks saying "please remove yourself if you know you're not going to handle these" and only remove him a few weeks later. Maintainers are volunteers, they can't be expected to spend *all* their time on appdb, they have time now and then; unless they are, for example, on a holiday. Sjors

June 29, 2009

Re: Removing active maintainers

by Ken Sharp

Dan Kegel wrote: > 3. Eight days is way too quick to remove an inactive maintainer. Six > months is more like it. That is far too long. After two weeks there are 100 test results waiting in the queue. Six months wouldn't help the users out at all. Their test results would disappear into a black hole.

June 29, 2009

Re: appwiz.cpl: updated French translation

by Frédéric Delanoy

2009/6/29 Paul Vriens <paul.vriens.wine(a)gmail.com>: > Frédéric Delanoy wrote: >> >> Some adaptation to English dialog too: "Add/Remove" button was renamed to >> "Remove", since its only purpose is to uninstall apps. >> > Hi Frédéric > > But the message clear says "or to modify its installed components". So I > guess a more appropriate text on the button would be "Modify/Remove" (or > something alike). > > -- > Cheers, > > Paul. Hmm... you must be right... I'll change it to "Change/Remove" and resubmit the patch. Thanks for your comment anyway Frédéric

June 29, 2009

Re: appwiz.cpl: updated French translation

by Paul Vriens

Frédéric Delanoy wrote: > Some adaptation to English dialog too: "Add/Remove" button was renamed to "Remove", since its only purpose is to uninstall apps. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Hi Frédéric But the message clear says "or to modify its installed components". So I guess a more appropriate text on the button would be "Modify/Remove" (or something alike). -- Cheers, Paul.

June 29, 2009