Shachar Shemesh wine-devel@shemesh.biz writes:
I can see why you say that, but I feel it narrows the discussion down to technical (will or will not compile) consideration only. I think that we also need to show commitment to separating inner from exported, and this, to me, means the source too.
I don't think it's a useful distinction to make in the source; IMO the current situation is just as useful, since it lets you distinguish between system headers and Wine headers. In a Winelib app, it makes sense to use <>, since a #include <winbase.h> and a #include <stdio.h> mean the same thing, they both include system headers from /usr/include. In the Wine source it's very different, a #include <winbase.h> will *not* include the system header from /usr/include, it will include the local header from the current source tree. That's an important distinction too, and one that we would lose by changing all includes to <>.
Both options make sense, and they both convey (different) useful information, so you can't say one is better than the other. And it doesn't make sense to change all the source files if the end result is not a clear improvement, which it isn't in that case.