James Hawkins <truiken <at> 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 dll dlls/quartz/ ) and wine-directx-dshow (includes dlls/{quartz,msdmo,qcap}/ ).
Well, the common (newbie) user probably won't know anything about dshow (neither do i ;) ), nor will he know what quartz stands for. The only thing he will see in his console is something like:
fixme:quartz: blablabla
So for example if he was about to search for duplicates before filing a bug, it's really better to have a per dll component.
One component per dll is ideal for development. There are some situations where a group component works best, e.g. directX. In most cases though, per dll is best. We can have both types of components. The following is a list of components that need to get the boot or be renamed:
wine-rebar (this is comctl32, no need for this component) wine-binary (what does that even mean?) wine-gdi-(printing) -> gdi wine-gui (per dll) wine-multimedia (per dll) wine-net (needs to be per dll) wine-patches (what was this for?) wine-user -> user32 wine-usp10.dll -> usp10 bug list, comments, login (what are these for?)
totally agree with James. I'll await the changes.....