As far as the kernel is concerned, Vista added pretty much all that was missing in NT 5.x. What did 7, 8 and 8.1 add that is so important? Though I guess targeting Vista would make us look bad simply because... well, it's Vista.
Regards, Alex On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 11:27:26AM +0200, David Quintana (gigaherz) wrote: > No, ros isn't a project to revive xp/2003, it has never been. The project > decided to stick to 2003 many years ago, because it was unreasonable to try > to keep up, and it was best to remain on a static target. When XP/2003 got > close to EOL, we decided to use the fact that ReactOS is NT5 as a PR > advantage, but I don't even know that this did much for us. > > The problem we have now, is this target is now so far back that many of us > feel that staying on it may hurt the project more than help it. > > Here is how I see it: There's two kinds of potentially large groups of > users of ReactOS: > > 1. The users of older hardware or software who require NT5 in order to > run specific devices or applications that aren't compatible with newer > systems, or > 2. The Windows users who like the Windows Platform, but want something > more flexible, adaptable, and free of corporate control. > > My guess is the number of people who would use ros simply because it > implements and old architecture and they have an irrational dislike of > anything newer, is a tiny minority. > If this is right, then we have two separate issues: > > 1. We can't really "sell" (convince them to use) reactos to the first > group, simply because it's too unstable an incomplete, so they'd rather > stay on the real thing rather than use ros (with exceptions), and > 2. We can't really "sell" reactos to the second group, unless we can run > the new applications designed for NT6+ that the second group is currently > enjoying. > > So the project has two possible goals: > > 1. Continue doing as it does now, keep the NT5.2 target, stabilize the > existing components, and develop the remaining components, all within the > limitations of NT5, or > 2. Start an NT6 effort, maintaining NT5 compatibility through the > compatibility systems (apphelp, sxs, and whatever else may be involved), > that are already being developed regardless, but opening the doors to all > the new software that has been developed for NT6+ > > And I have a strong feeling that the first group are less likely to > contribute to the project, and less likely to adopt the project in the > future, so yes, I would like the project to move in the other direction, > not back to a dynamic target, just choose a new target to stick to, that > isn't so far back, but isn't also being changed constantly anymore, and > right now, that would be NT6.3 (Windows 8.1 -- but we don't have to > implement the Modern UI or remove the start menu, or any of that crap, this > is about structure and APIs). > > I may be biased, though: I'm most definitely on the second group. As a > developer, I like ros because I like Windows over other platforms, but I'd > love if it was opensource so I could tweak certain things beyond the > options they provide. If ReactOS would start an effort to add NT6 features, > I'd most definitely feel a renewed interest in the project, which you may > have noticed has been already quite low these days. > > P.S.: There's no NT7, Microsoft decided to change the NT version to match > the client version, so windows 10 is now NT10, and like apple did with OSX, > they plan on making future versions of windows just 10.x ;P > > > On 14 May 2016 at 08:51, Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo <elh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > And, ROS is not complete yet. Isnt it more reliable to try to get it > > stable for NT5, then shitch to NT6? > > > > If we change now, we are leaving things undone.... and we will leave them > > again when switching to NT7, and so..... > > > > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo < > > elh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> isnt this a project to "revive WinXP/2k3"? > >> > >> i think there is no need to upgrade to NT6... > >> > >> Yes, we will get outdated, but if we revive NT5, probably ROS can get > >> that support back. Not for XP, but ReactOS. And XP/2k3 apps will work > >> again, with us > >> > >> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 7:22 PM, Ged Murphy < > >> gedmurphy.mailli...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> It might be worth putting a doc together listing the kernel parts we’re > >>> missing, the areas which need changes, and the areas which can be left > >>> as-is. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> *From:* Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark > >>> Jansen > >>> *Sent:* 12 May 2016 18:14 > >>> *To:* ReactOS Development List <ros-dev@reactos.org> > >>> *Subject:* Re: [ros-dev] Pale Moon drops ReactOS support > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> For the features where this is possible without kernel support, > >>> > >>> there is a mechanism in the pipeline that makes this possible: 'apphelp' > >>> > >>> Currently I am still working on the base layer, > >>> > >>> but when that is progressed a bit more we could integrate it more > >>> tightly in the Ldr, > >>> > >>> so that it uses the target platform to apply automatic fixes (shims). > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Having said that, it might be worth to upgrade parts of the kernel (only > >>> where it makes sense) to NT6 already, > >>> > >>> without exposing that to applications. > >>> > >>> Especially in new parts, as it would mean that something is written for > >>> NT5 now, and first thing we do next is upgrade it to NT6. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Zachary Gorden < > >>> drakekaizer...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Quite a few 'userland' features of NT6 requires kernel support to > >>> function properly. If we go in, it would be, do NT6 kernel and slowly > >>> bring the userland up to NT6. But we don't have a fully working NT5 > >>> kernel yet, so.... > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 8:34 AM, David Quintana (gigaherz) > >>> <gigah...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > If we do NT6, we may want to have latest NT6 instead of trying to > >>> stick to > >>> > an older one and having the same deprecation issue in a couple years? > >>> > > >>> > Also, what about the "idea" of keeping the majority of the kernel and > >>> large > >>> > part of the usermode NT5, but having compatibility profiles that > >>> > implement/emulate NT6 API functions using the existing NT5 feature > >>> set? Is > >>> > that unrealistic? > >>> > > >>> > On 12 May 2016 at 14:39, Aleksey Bragin <alek...@reactos.org> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> Which again brings in the topic of updating the version we are > >>> targeting. > >>> >> Windows 7 would be a minimum target these days, IMO. > >>> >> > >>> >> Regards, > >>> >> Aleksey Bragin > >>> >> > >>> >> On 12.05.2016 14:04, Ged Murphy wrote: > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Yeah it's nonsense. No one drops support for ReactOS, they drop > >>> support > >>> >>> for > >>> >>> older versions of Windows which likely includes reactos too. > >>> >>> If they were adding in ReactOS specific code, they were doing it > >>> wrong. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> The bigger issue here is that a lot of apps are starting to drop > >>> support > >>> >>> for > >>> >>> XP and recommend a minimum of Win7. If we don't do something about > >>> our > >>> >>> insistence on sticking with 2k3, we'll soon be in a position where no > >>> >>> browsers will run on ros, as well as a whole other list of apps. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Ged. > >>> >>> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> Ros-dev mailing list > >>> >> Ros-dev@reactos.org > >>> >> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> > Ros-dev mailing list > >>> > Ros-dev@reactos.org > >>> > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Ros-dev mailing list > >>> Ros-dev@reactos.org > >>> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Ros-dev mailing list > >>> Ros-dev@reactos.org > >>> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev > >>> > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ros-dev mailing list > > Ros-dev@reactos.org > > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Ros-dev mailing list > Ros-dev@reactos.org > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev -- Alexander Andrejevic <thefl...@sdf.lonestar.org> SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
