Hi Aric,
What I am wondering about is that there is still a lot of code in these files we have no interest in. The file reader and http reader and other things that we do not use (it is accessed just by the direct stream methods) and those things dependencies.
Should I leave all this code present in our version of the modules and mostly preserve the libmpg123 work to make it easier to keep updating forward? Or should i remove all the unneeded code so that the modules present in winehq are leaner and more targeted to just the things the wine needs, but then they deviate much more from the original libmpg123 source?
Personally, I don't see the point in adding files to the build that aren't used. So if an entire file isn't referenced from Wine, I wouldn't add it in the first place.
If there's a file that is used in Wine, but that has code that isn't used, you might add it unmodified as one patch, and remove the unused code in another. The purpose for adding it unmodified is to make it easier to diff with the upstream version.
Another approach would be to add the unmodified code, then disable the unused code using comments or #if 0. This could be useful if we were trying to apply patches to upstream to our own codebase. It seems as though we update from upstream sources rather seldom, though, so I don't think this is worth the ugliness of dead code being left in the source.
A final complication is when one file, which is used, contains references to files that aren't used. In this case I'd say add the file with the references removed, and hopefully the deletions would be clear in the diff from upstream.
This is all my opinion of course. What were you thinking?
With what I have now the mp3 source material this game i am testing is using sounds much much better. So it should be a great improvement.
Well done :) --Juan