Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Well! Above logic just eliminated Wine my friends. If Native dlls and Registry is a set back on "Free" Wine development, than logic would follow that, running native Windows applications (Wine) is a set back/discouragement of Free SW development.
I'm almost sure my words will change nothing, but I must say them! (And maybe they will)
Wine development as been following CodeWeavers business plan for a long time, which is more than fine, but this time it broke a statuesque.
You're very quick to accuse.
This is a techical list and we are technical people, so let's have a technical discussion about the benefits to Wine of the change, rather than a mud-slinging, name calling flame fest, OK?
Firstly, the reason that the ability to specify a registry to load in the config file was removed, if I understand correctly, is that if there's no config file, then there's no place so specify a place to load the registry from. There's only going to be a Wine registry, no config file, so the registry location will be fixed.
Secondly, Steven and I have stated that we believe that Wine would be better served without the ability to load the registry from an existing windows install. Mike Hearn disagreed with me, and Alexandre likely disagrees too.
Thirdly, the description of Wine, from the front page of www.winehq.org is "Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely free alternative implementation of the Windows API consisting of 100% non-Microsoft code, however Wine can optionally use native Windows DLLs if they are available." There's nothing about Win4Lin like functionality in there.
I believe we can better write software that works as a 100% non-Microsoft implementation by encouraging people to install software into Wine, report bugs, and use all builtin dlls where possible.
Feel free to disagree with me, but argue a technical argument, not an emotive political one.
Mike