Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Revert done. Unless you had local changes in NTVDM, your local changes in win32k should be OK, if you haven’t updated your local trunks to some revision in between 66575 and the revert! Here I have 4 different local WCs with local patches in different parts of win32k/winsrv (modules that were moved), and after the revert (and later update of the local WCs) the local changes remained. H. De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Sylvain Petreolle Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:58 À : ReactOS Development List Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM Backup ALL your local changes. Svn doesn't do existed-deleted-but-is-back changes : as the history goes, it deletes, adds and changes files. With local changes, you get tree conflicts : modified but deleted. Again, back up with svn diff and/or plain copy the working copy before any update. Kind regards, Sylvain Petreolle _ De : Pierre Schweitzer À : ReactOS Development List Envoyé le : Vendredi 6 mars 2015 13h46 Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM On 03/06/2015 01:30 PM, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: > First I would prefer to revert everything I done so far for that (failed) > attempt of tree restructure, because otherwise nobody will be happy. As far > as I can see in a local SVN repo I did here, if I revert to the tree shape > pre-66575 nothing should break (I mean, if you update your local copy that > was at, let’s say, revision 66574 and you update to revision > after-my-would-be-revert, it should be ok, your local changes should survive. Given these last information, I'm all for a revert. > > > > Then it would be nice to have a discussion with everybody and seriously to > how move the main parts of the things. > > > > Cheers, > > Hermès. > > > > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de daniel.reimer > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:12 > À : ReactOS Development List > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, > I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > > > Hii, > > > > Well... In theory the restructuring might be logical and maybe even a good > idea to separate some of the DLL/win32 folder etc, but this can't be done as > one man show. It breaks the patches in jira, breaks the stuff our devs might > have locally and maybe someone has something to say to your plans. > > How to resolve this? Tbh, no clue. But a open discussion BEFORE commiting > would be a start IMO. So guys, what now? Can we keep it or not? > > > > Greetings > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > Von meinem Samsung Gerät gesendet. > > > > ---- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---- > Von: Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO > Datum: 06.03.2015 12:03 (GMT+01:00) > An: 'ReactOS Development List' > Betreff: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > So... > > ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ? > > Hermès. > > -Message d'origine----- > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey > Bragin > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48 > À : ReactOS Development List > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: >> Hi, >> >> So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev >> about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with >> r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, >> even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! > Wrong. > You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support this > change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel "at > home" in ReactOS source code. > > Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced > everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many > working copies) just because you feel the tree structure was wrong. > > This is just ridiculous. As Pierre said, we are a team here. And teamwork > without big issues is what is making our project a good place to work in, to > get pleasure and satisfaction from the work done. > > >> In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Adapt and over come,,, or die.. Sounds like a daily ReactOS thing. On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Magnus Johnsson wrote: > Question, from someone who is not a ReactOS dev, a solution to this kind > of thing might be, say, have a plan for how (if) restructuring is to be > done, and, oh, a vote? I don't think that the work put in needs to be > thrown away, but maybe said patches could be broken up into smaller ones > and being judged case-by-case? Also, if you could document the work that > needed to be done to allow restructuring to be done the way you planned, > that might certainly be helpful not only for this case, but maybe could be > hacked into a newbie-guide for how the source tree is laid out :). > > 2015-03-06 13:46 GMT+01:00 Pierre Schweitzer : > >> On 03/06/2015 01:30 PM, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: >> > First I would prefer to revert everything I done so far for that >> (failed) attempt of tree restructure, because otherwise nobody will be >> happy. As far as I can see in a local SVN repo I did here, if I revert to >> the tree shape pre-66575 nothing should break (I mean, if you update your >> local copy that was at, let’s say, revision 66574 and you update to >> revision after-my-would-be-revert, it should be ok, your local changes >> should survive. >> >> Given these last information, I'm all for a revert. >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > Then it would be nice to have a discussion with everybody and seriously >> to how move the main parts of the things. >> > >> > >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Hermès. >> > >> > >> > >> > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de >> daniel.reimer >> > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:12 >> > À : ReactOS Development List >> > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree >> (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM >> > >> > >> > >> > Hii, >> > >> > >> > >> > Well... In theory the restructuring might be logical and maybe even a >> good idea to separate some of the DLL/win32 folder etc, but this can't be >> done as one man show. It breaks the patches in jira, breaks the stuff our >> devs might have locally and maybe someone has something to say to your >> plans. >> > >> > How to resolve this? Tbh, no clue. But a open discussion BEFORE >> commiting would be a start IMO. So guys, what now? Can we keep it or not? >> > >> > >> > >> > Greetings >> > >> > >> > >> > Daniel >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Von meinem Samsung Gerät gesendet. >> > >> > >> > >> > Ursprüngliche Nachricht >> > Von: Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO >> > Datum: 06.03.2015 12:03 (GMT+01:00) >> > An: 'ReactOS Development List' >> > Betreff: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree >> (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM >> > >> > So... >> > >> > ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ? >> > >> > Hermès. >> > >> > -Message d'origine- >> > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey >> > Bragin >> > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48 >> > À : ReactOS Development List >> > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree >> > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM >> > >> > On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev >> >> about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with >> >> r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, >> >> even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! >> > Wrong. >> > You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support >> this >> > change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel >> "at >> > home" in ReactOS source code. >> > >> > Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced >> > everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many >> > working copies) just because you feel the tre
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Question, from someone who is not a ReactOS dev, a solution to this kind of thing might be, say, have a plan for how (if) restructuring is to be done, and, oh, a vote? I don't think that the work put in needs to be thrown away, but maybe said patches could be broken up into smaller ones and being judged case-by-case? Also, if you could document the work that needed to be done to allow restructuring to be done the way you planned, that might certainly be helpful not only for this case, but maybe could be hacked into a newbie-guide for how the source tree is laid out :). 2015-03-06 13:46 GMT+01:00 Pierre Schweitzer : > On 03/06/2015 01:30 PM, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: > > First I would prefer to revert everything I done so far for that > (failed) attempt of tree restructure, because otherwise nobody will be > happy. As far as I can see in a local SVN repo I did here, if I revert to > the tree shape pre-66575 nothing should break (I mean, if you update your > local copy that was at, let’s say, revision 66574 and you update to > revision after-my-would-be-revert, it should be ok, your local changes > should survive. > > Given these last information, I'm all for a revert. > > > > > > > > > Then it would be nice to have a discussion with everybody and seriously > to how move the main parts of the things. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Hermès. > > > > > > > > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de > daniel.reimer > > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:12 > > À : ReactOS Development List > > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > > > > > > > Hii, > > > > > > > > Well... In theory the restructuring might be logical and maybe even a > good idea to separate some of the DLL/win32 folder etc, but this can't be > done as one man show. It breaks the patches in jira, breaks the stuff our > devs might have locally and maybe someone has something to say to your > plans. > > > > How to resolve this? Tbh, no clue. But a open discussion BEFORE > commiting would be a start IMO. So guys, what now? Can we keep it or not? > > > > > > > > Greetings > > > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Von meinem Samsung Gerät gesendet. > > > > > > > > Ursprüngliche Nachricht > > Von: Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO > > Datum: 06.03.2015 12:03 (GMT+01:00) > > An: 'ReactOS Development List' > > Betreff: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > > > So... > > > > ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ? > > > > Hermès. > > > > -Message d'origine- > > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey > > Bragin > > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48 > > À : ReactOS Development List > > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > > > On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev > >> about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with > >> r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, > >> even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! > > Wrong. > > You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support > this > > change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel "at > > home" in ReactOS source code. > > > > Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced > > everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many > > working copies) just because you feel the tree structure was wrong. > > > > This is just ridiculous. As Pierre said, we are a team here. And teamwork > > without big issues is what is making our project a good place to work > in, to > > get pleasure and satisfaction from the work done. > > > > > >> In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along > >> with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here: > >> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html . > > Imagine what, I was part of it. > > > >> At that > >> time the m
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Backup ALL your local changes.Svn doesn't do existed-deleted-but-is-back changes :as the history goes, it deletes, adds and changes files. With local changes, you get tree conflicts : modified but deleted. Again, back up with svn diff and/or plain copy the working copy before any update. Kind regards, Sylvain Petreolle De : Pierre Schweitzer À : ReactOS Development List Envoyé le : Vendredi 6 mars 2015 13h46 Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM On 03/06/2015 01:30 PM, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: > First I would prefer to revert everything I done so far for that (failed) > attempt of tree restructure, because otherwise nobody will be happy. As far > as I can see in a local SVN repo I did here, if I revert to the tree shape > pre-66575 nothing should break (I mean, if you update your local copy that > was at, let’s say, revision 66574 and you update to revision > after-my-would-be-revert, it should be ok, your local changes should survive. Given these last information, I'm all for a revert. > > > > Then it would be nice to have a discussion with everybody and seriously to > how move the main parts of the things. > > > > Cheers, > > Hermès. > > > > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de daniel.reimer > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:12 > À : ReactOS Development List > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, > I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > > > Hii, > > > > Well... In theory the restructuring might be logical and maybe even a good > idea to separate some of the DLL/win32 folder etc, but this can't be done as > one man show. It breaks the patches in jira, breaks the stuff our devs might > have locally and maybe someone has something to say to your plans. > > How to resolve this? Tbh, no clue. But a open discussion BEFORE commiting > would be a start IMO. So guys, what now? Can we keep it or not? > > > > Greetings > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > Von meinem Samsung Gerät gesendet. > > > > ---- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---- > Von: Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO > Datum: 06.03.2015 12:03 (GMT+01:00) > An: 'ReactOS Development List' > Betreff: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > So... > > ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ? > > Hermès. > > -Message d'origine----- > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey > Bragin > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48 > À : ReactOS Development List > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: >> Hi, >> >> So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev >> about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with >> r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, >> even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! > Wrong. > You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support this > change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel "at > home" in ReactOS source code. > > Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced > everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many > working copies) just because you feel the tree structure was wrong. > > This is just ridiculous. As Pierre said, we are a team here. And teamwork > without big issues is what is making our project a good place to work in, to > get pleasure and satisfaction from the work done. > > >> In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along >> with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here: >> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html . > Imagine what, I was part of it. > >> At that >> time the main argument was that we were also in the middle of changing >> the old build system (rbuild) to a new one (cmake) so it was >> problematic to do those two big changes at once. Also at that time, >> seeing the argumentation of Ged, Timo, Jérôme and the few others >> (active developers) who dared to participate to this discussion, it >> was clear that a tree restructure was necessary anyway, sooner or later. > This is called > https://en.wikipedi
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
On 06.03.2015 15:46, Pierre Schweitzer wrote: On 03/06/2015 01:30 PM, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: First I would prefer to revert everything I done so far for that (failed) attempt of tree restructure, because otherwise nobody will be happy. As far as I can see in a local SVN repo I did here, if I revert to the tree shape pre-66575 nothing should break (I mean, if you update your local copy that was at, let’s say, revision 66574 and you update to revision after-my-would-be-revert, it should be ok, your local changes should survive. Given these last information, I'm all for a revert. Me too, even though technically I like some aspects of the restructure, and appreciate your time spent on the issue, it's definitely not wasted. Regards, Aleksey Bragin ___ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
On 03/06/2015 01:30 PM, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: > First I would prefer to revert everything I done so far for that (failed) > attempt of tree restructure, because otherwise nobody will be happy. As far > as I can see in a local SVN repo I did here, if I revert to the tree shape > pre-66575 nothing should break (I mean, if you update your local copy that > was at, let’s say, revision 66574 and you update to revision > after-my-would-be-revert, it should be ok, your local changes should survive. Given these last information, I'm all for a revert. > > > > Then it would be nice to have a discussion with everybody and seriously to > how move the main parts of the things. > > > > Cheers, > > Hermès. > > > > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de daniel.reimer > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:12 > À : ReactOS Development List > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, > I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > > > Hii, > > > > Well... In theory the restructuring might be logical and maybe even a good > idea to separate some of the DLL/win32 folder etc, but this can't be done as > one man show. It breaks the patches in jira, breaks the stuff our devs might > have locally and maybe someone has something to say to your plans. > > How to resolve this? Tbh, no clue. But a open discussion BEFORE commiting > would be a start IMO. So guys, what now? Can we keep it or not? > > > > Greetings > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > Von meinem Samsung Gerät gesendet. > > > > ---- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---- > Von: Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO > Datum: 06.03.2015 12:03 (GMT+01:00) > An: 'ReactOS Development List' > Betreff: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > So... > > ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ? > > Hermès. > > -----Message d'origine- > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey > Bragin > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48 > À : ReactOS Development List > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: >> Hi, >> >> So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev >> about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with >> r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, >> even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! > Wrong. > You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support this > change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel "at > home" in ReactOS source code. > > Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced > everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many > working copies) just because you feel the tree structure was wrong. > > This is just ridiculous. As Pierre said, we are a team here. And teamwork > without big issues is what is making our project a good place to work in, to > get pleasure and satisfaction from the work done. > > >> In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along >> with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here: >> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html . > Imagine what, I was part of it. > >> At that >> time the main argument was that we were also in the middle of changing >> the old build system (rbuild) to a new one (cmake) so it was >> problematic to do those two big changes at once. Also at that time, >> seeing the argumentation of Ged, Timo, Jérôme and the few others >> (active developers) who dared to participate to this discussion, it >> was clear that a tree restructure was necessary anyway, sooner or later. > This is called > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-purchase_rationalization . After you made > the change you start explaining that everyone was supporting it, it was so > much needed, and let's just forget about any side-effects it may have > caused. > >> In 2012 some tree restructure happened (r56305) by moving around and >> in a more logical manner some core components of win32. > Yep. > >> What happens now in 2015, i.e. 5 years after ? We have CMake well >> established, everything works, but only win32 core was reorganized. > Sure, 5 years is a magic num
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
First I would prefer to revert everything I done so far for that (failed) attempt of tree restructure, because otherwise nobody will be happy. As far as I can see in a local SVN repo I did here, if I revert to the tree shape pre-66575 nothing should break (I mean, if you update your local copy that was at, let’s say, revision 66574 and you update to revision after-my-would-be-revert, it should be ok, your local changes should survive. Then it would be nice to have a discussion with everybody and seriously to how move the main parts of the things. Cheers, Hermès. De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de daniel.reimer Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:12 À : ReactOS Development List Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM Hii, Well... In theory the restructuring might be logical and maybe even a good idea to separate some of the DLL/win32 folder etc, but this can't be done as one man show. It breaks the patches in jira, breaks the stuff our devs might have locally and maybe someone has something to say to your plans. How to resolve this? Tbh, no clue. But a open discussion BEFORE commiting would be a start IMO. So guys, what now? Can we keep it or not? Greetings Daniel Von meinem Samsung Gerät gesendet. Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO Datum: 06.03.2015 12:03 (GMT+01:00) An: 'ReactOS Development List' Betreff: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM So... ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ? Hermès. -Message d'origine- De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey Bragin Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48 À : ReactOS Development List Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: > Hi, > > So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev > about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with > r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, > even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! Wrong. You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support this change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel "at home" in ReactOS source code. Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many working copies) just because you feel the tree structure was wrong. This is just ridiculous. As Pierre said, we are a team here. And teamwork without big issues is what is making our project a good place to work in, to get pleasure and satisfaction from the work done. > In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along > with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here: > http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html . Imagine what, I was part of it. > At that > time the main argument was that we were also in the middle of changing > the old build system (rbuild) to a new one (cmake) so it was > problematic to do those two big changes at once. Also at that time, > seeing the argumentation of Ged, Timo, Jérôme and the few others > (active developers) who dared to participate to this discussion, it > was clear that a tree restructure was necessary anyway, sooner or later. This is called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-purchase_rationalization . After you made the change you start explaining that everyone was supporting it, it was so much needed, and let's just forget about any side-effects it may have caused. > In 2012 some tree restructure happened (r56305) by moving around and > in a more logical manner some core components of win32. Yep. > What happens now in 2015, i.e. 5 years after ? We have CMake well > established, everything works, but only win32 core was reorganized. Sure, 5 years is a magic number which means you can safely ignore everyone else and just force your own change. > I made http://jira.reactos.org/browse/CORE-9111 , people started to > give proposals. You came back with the almost same argument, that is > to finish the existing things first (adapt that: at the time of CMake, > it was CMake, now, it's fix all ReactOS 0.4 bugs), and then improve > structure of source tree. Since not all the existing bugs will be > fixed by then, we can continue this way and wait another 5 years in order to have a real tree restructure? > I don't think so. > So I took that for granted and committed r66575. You know, users don't care about source code tree structure. Tr
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Hii, Well... In theory the restructuring might be logical and maybe even a good idea to separate some of the DLL/win32 folder etc, but this can't be done as one man show. It breaks the patches in jira, breaks the stuff our devs might have locally and maybe someone has something to say to your plans.How to resolve this? Tbh, no clue. But a open discussion BEFORE commiting would be a start IMO. So guys, what now? Can we keep it or not? Greetings Daniel Von meinem Samsung Gerät gesendet. Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO Datum: 06.03.2015 12:03 (GMT+01:00) An: 'ReactOS Development List' Betreff: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM So... ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ? Hermès. -Message d'origine- De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey Bragin Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48 À : ReactOS Development List Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: > Hi, > > So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev > about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with > r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, > even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! Wrong. You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support this change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel "at home" in ReactOS source code. Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many working copies) just because you feel the tree structure was wrong. This is just ridiculous. As Pierre said, we are a team here. And teamwork without big issues is what is making our project a good place to work in, to get pleasure and satisfaction from the work done. > In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along > with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here: > http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html . Imagine what, I was part of it. > At that > time the main argument was that we were also in the middle of changing > the old build system (rbuild) to a new one (cmake) so it was > problematic to do those two big changes at once. Also at that time, > seeing the argumentation of Ged, Timo, Jérôme and the few others > (active developers) who dared to participate to this discussion, it > was clear that a tree restructure was necessary anyway, sooner or later. This is called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-purchase_rationalization . After you made the change you start explaining that everyone was supporting it, it was so much needed, and let's just forget about any side-effects it may have caused. > In 2012 some tree restructure happened (r56305) by moving around and > in a more logical manner some core components of win32. Yep. > What happens now in 2015, i.e. 5 years after ? We have CMake well > established, everything works, but only win32 core was reorganized. Sure, 5 years is a magic number which means you can safely ignore everyone else and just force your own change. > I made http://jira.reactos.org/browse/CORE-9111 , people started to > give proposals. You came back with the almost same argument, that is > to finish the existing things first (adapt that: at the time of CMake, > it was CMake, now, it's fix all ReactOS 0.4 bugs), and then improve > structure of source tree. Since not all the existing bugs will be > fixed by then, we can continue this way and wait another 5 years in order to have a real tree restructure? > I don't think so. > So I took that for granted and committed r66575. You know, users don't care about source code tree structure. Tree is for developers. Users (and hence, popularity and usability of ReactOS) like when ReactOS does not crash, when ReactOS runs their apps, when ReactOS loads native binary drivers. And my point is that internal changes (code refactorings, tree restructures, reformatting) must happen only when the advantage of that is more than the disadvantage/side effects. Are you going to say that ReactOS 0.4 is closer now because you restructured the tree according to your taste? Was there any urge to do the restructure? > Active developers really think (at least, myself) it's a pain in the > *** The key part: "myself". Let's face it: you silently ignored my opinion and decided not to ask anyone else. This is PITA, not the tree structure. > that when we code on some given module (example: shell), we need to > modify some bit of code in base/shell/whateve
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
So... ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ? Hermès. -Message d'origine- De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey Bragin Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48 À : ReactOS Development List Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: > Hi, > > So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev > about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with > r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, > even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! Wrong. You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support this change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel "at home" in ReactOS source code. Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many working copies) just because you feel the tree structure was wrong. This is just ridiculous. As Pierre said, we are a team here. And teamwork without big issues is what is making our project a good place to work in, to get pleasure and satisfaction from the work done. > In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along > with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here: > http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html . Imagine what, I was part of it. > At that > time the main argument was that we were also in the middle of changing > the old build system (rbuild) to a new one (cmake) so it was > problematic to do those two big changes at once. Also at that time, > seeing the argumentation of Ged, Timo, Jérôme and the few others > (active developers) who dared to participate to this discussion, it > was clear that a tree restructure was necessary anyway, sooner or later. This is called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-purchase_rationalization . After you made the change you start explaining that everyone was supporting it, it was so much needed, and let's just forget about any side-effects it may have caused. > In 2012 some tree restructure happened (r56305) by moving around and > in a more logical manner some core components of win32. Yep. > What happens now in 2015, i.e. 5 years after ? We have CMake well > established, everything works, but only win32 core was reorganized. Sure, 5 years is a magic number which means you can safely ignore everyone else and just force your own change. > I made http://jira.reactos.org/browse/CORE-9111 , people started to > give proposals. You came back with the almost same argument, that is > to finish the existing things first (adapt that: at the time of CMake, > it was CMake, now, it's fix all ReactOS 0.4 bugs), and then improve > structure of source tree. Since not all the existing bugs will be > fixed by then, we can continue this way and wait another 5 years in order to have a real tree restructure? > I don't think so. > So I took that for granted and committed r66575. You know, users don't care about source code tree structure. Tree is for developers. Users (and hence, popularity and usability of ReactOS) like when ReactOS does not crash, when ReactOS runs their apps, when ReactOS loads native binary drivers. And my point is that internal changes (code refactorings, tree restructures, reformatting) must happen only when the advantage of that is more than the disadvantage/side effects. Are you going to say that ReactOS 0.4 is closer now because you restructured the tree according to your taste? Was there any urge to do the restructure? > Active developers really think (at least, myself) it's a pain in the > *** The key part: "myself". Let's face it: you silently ignored my opinion and decided not to ask anyone else. This is PITA, not the tree structure. > that when we code on some given module (example: shell), we need to > modify some bit of code in base/shell/whatever, some bit of code in > dll/win32/shell32, some bit of code here and there. All the code of > the shell should be tied together. This goes also for everything else: > the core of NT (kernel, ntdll, "base" drivers...), the win32 subsystem > (win32k; for it the change in r56305 started to make things more > logical: you would not have to modify code in some win32k/ directory > while also changing > dll/win32/gdi32 or dll/win32/user32 that were by the way amongst all > the rest of wine dlls, etc...) . It's not "more logical", it's just different logical approaches. > Because I didn't want to wait yet another 5 years I decided to start > something. Just remember, trunk is not your private branch. You have to take other devs opinion
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
month until everybody starts to vote. Of course you would get people thinking it's better to do à la Wine and sort the files by extension type (that's what we almost have currently) and it was already repeated that it is BAD because it doesn't translate the fact that ROS/windows is built by modules; others would have thought it's nice to have this piece of thing next to another one whereas this can be postponed later on until the *obvious* parts of code have been properly packed together. Yes, unless I don't know something and suddenly all your ideas are absolutely true without the need for verification. Mine aren't, I always consult with other skilled people. And because of that, here is my proposal: UNTIL details get fixed, I propose to: - keep the /boot/, /include/, /lib/, /media/ and /tools/ directories (as well as /cmake/ and the files in / ) untouched. - ntoskrnl, ntdll and the drivers we have in /drivers/ (SAUF, the multimedia ones) go into some main "ntcore" directory (ntcore, ntos, call it whatever you prefer. I'm inclined to the second name, but I'm ok with the first one). - the keyboard layouts can be moved either to win32ss/ or to / (in case we can give sense to keyboard layouts in "pure" NT, for example when we run usetup, etc...) - ok... my already-done (but revertable) modifs from 66575 (directory renamings can be done, it's not set in stone). - putting all printing support in some /win32/printsup (or "printing"...) directory : that means: localspl, ntprint, printui, spoolsv and spoolss, and winspool (so far...) Oh, now you shared your secret plan with us. Thank you so much! Actually, I would like to invent something better than just copying the NT source code tree layout. That's what I'm 99.99% sure (and what I think is quite clear). Concerning the rest (that can create discussion) I still keep it in old directories. ... Regards, Hermès. -----Message d'origine- De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey Bragin Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 00:15 À : ros-dev@reactos.org Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM Hermes, What the fuck, may I ask? I don't understand since when we started doing big changes in trunk without talking (or listening) to anyone at all, just at your own discretion? Are you so sure the change is accepted by majority of our developers? Did you get approval of those devs? Give them some respect which they earned over years with their skills and commitment. I understand ReactOS is a very loosely managed project (to favor ease of development), but totally ignoring everyone? I checked CORE-9111 and I don't see any single comment from Timo, Jerome, James, whoever else counts. Regards, Aleksey Bragin P.S. I'm not talking about actual changes, I'm talking about the process and attitude. On 06.03.2015 2:03, hbelu...@svn.reactos.org wrote: Author: hbelusca Date: Thu Mar 5 23:03:33 2015 New Revision: 66575 URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575&view=rev Log: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM ___ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Yes, What the fuck? I have lots patches and you just broke them all. What made you think you can decide on your own how the new structure is supposed to look like? Did you ask me or Jim for how win32ss looks like now? We already restructured win32ss so why are you re-restructuring it on your own? Has it ever come to your mind that the main committers in that area should be asked before breaking stuff for them? This is not the fucking wild-west! Timo Am 06.03.2015 um 00:14 schrieb Aleksey Bragin: Hermes, What the fuck, may I ask? I don't understand since when we started doing big changes in trunk without talking (or listening) to anyone at all, just at your own discretion? Are you so sure the change is accepted by majority of our developers? Did you get approval of those devs? Give them some respect which they earned over years with their skills and commitment. I understand ReactOS is a very loosely managed project (to favor ease of development), but totally ignoring everyone? I checked CORE-9111 and I don't see any single comment from Timo, Jerome, James, whoever else counts. Regards, Aleksey Bragin P.S. I'm not talking about actual changes, I'm talking about the process and attitude. On 06.03.2015 2:03, hbelu...@svn.reactos.org wrote: Author: hbelusca Date: Thu Mar 5 23:03:33 2015 New Revision: 66575 URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575&view=rev Log: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM ___ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
ros-dev, then wait 1 month until > everybody starts to vote. Of course you would get people thinking it's > better to do à la Wine and sort the files by extension type (that's what we > almost have currently) and it was already repeated that it is BAD because it > doesn't translate the fact that ROS/windows is built by modules; others > would have thought it's nice to have this piece of thing next to another one > whereas this can be postponed later on until the *obvious* parts of code > have been properly packed together. > > And because of that, here is my proposal: UNTIL details get fixed, I propose > to: > - keep the /boot/, /include/, /lib/, /media/ and /tools/ directories (as > well as /cmake/ and the files in / ) untouched. > - ntoskrnl, ntdll and the drivers we have in /drivers/ (SAUF, the multimedia > ones) go into some main "ntcore" directory (ntcore, ntos, call it whatever > you prefer. I'm inclined to the second name, but I'm ok with the first one). > - the keyboard layouts can be moved either to win32ss/ or to / (in case we > can give sense to keyboard layouts in "pure" NT, for example when we run > usetup, etc...) > - ok... my already-done (but revertable) modifs from 66575 (directory > renamings can be done, it's not set in stone). > - putting all printing support in some /win32/printsup (or "printing"...) > directory : that means: localspl, ntprint, printui, spoolsv and spoolss, and > winspool (so far...) > > That's what I'm 99.99% sure (and what I think is quite clear). Concerning > the rest (that can create discussion) I still keep it in old directories. > > Regards, > Hermès. > > > > -Message d'origine- > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey > Bragin > Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 00:15 > À : ros-dev@reactos.org > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree > (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM > > Hermes, > > What the fuck, may I ask? > > I don't understand since when we started doing big changes in trunk without > talking (or listening) to anyone at all, just at your own discretion? > > Are you so sure the change is accepted by majority of our developers? > Did you get approval of those devs? Give them some respect which they earned > over years with their skills and commitment. > > I understand ReactOS is a very loosely managed project (to favor ease of > development), but totally ignoring everyone? > I checked CORE-9111 and I don't see any single comment from Timo, Jerome, > James, whoever else counts. > > Regards, > Aleksey Bragin > P.S. I'm not talking about actual changes, I'm talking about the process and > attitude. > > On 06.03.2015 2:03, hbelu...@svn.reactos.org wrote: >> Author: hbelusca >> Date: Thu Mar 5 23:03:33 2015 >> New Revision: 66575 >> >> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575&view=rev >> Log: >> Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, >> Shell, Services, MVDM >> > > > ___ > 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 > -- Pierre Schweitzer System & Network Administrator Senior Kernel Developer ReactOS Deutschland e.V. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Does this mean Hermes just volunteered to adapt the ~130 patches in JIRA to his new tree structure...? Am 06.03.2015 um 00:58 schrieb Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO: Hi, So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here: http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html . At that time the main argument was that we were also in the middle of changing the old build system (rbuild) to a new one (cmake) so it was problematic to do those two big changes at once. Also at that time, seeing the argumentation of Ged, Timo, Jérôme and the few others (active developers) who dared to participate to this discussion, it was clear that a tree restructure was necessary anyway, sooner or later. In 2012 some tree restructure happened (r56305) by moving around and in a more logical manner some core components of win32. What happens now in 2015, i.e. 5 years after ? We have CMake well established, everything works, but only win32 core was reorganized. I made http://jira.reactos.org/browse/CORE-9111 , people started to give proposals. You came back with the almost same argument, that is to finish the existing things first (adapt that: at the time of CMake, it was CMake, now, it's fix all ReactOS 0.4 bugs), and then improve structure of source tree. Since not all the existing bugs will be fixed by then, we can continue this way and wait another 5 years in order to have a real tree restructure? I don't think so. So I took that for granted and committed r66575. Active developers really think (at least, myself) it's a pain in the *** that when we code on some given module (example: shell), we need to modify some bit of code in base/shell/whatever, some bit of code in dll/win32/shell32, some bit of code here and there. All the code of the shell should be tied together. This goes also for everything else: the core of NT (kernel, ntdll, "base" drivers...), the win32 subsystem (win32k; for it the change in r56305 started to make things more logical: you would not have to modify code in some win32k/ directory while also changing dll/win32/gdi32 or dll/win32/user32 that were by the way amongst all the rest of wine dlls, etc...) . Because I didn't want to wait yet another 5 years I decided to start something. OK my fault I would have to get a synthesis of the different proposals of tree restructures I got, then put in ros-dev, then wait 1 month until everybody starts to vote. Of course you would get people thinking it's better to do à la Wine and sort the files by extension type (that's what we almost have currently) and it was already repeated that it is BAD because it doesn't translate the fact that ROS/windows is built by modules; others would have thought it's nice to have this piece of thing next to another one whereas this can be postponed later on until the *obvious* parts of code have been properly packed together. And because of that, here is my proposal: UNTIL details get fixed, I propose to: - keep the /boot/, /include/, /lib/, /media/ and /tools/ directories (as well as /cmake/ and the files in / ) untouched. - ntoskrnl, ntdll and the drivers we have in /drivers/ (SAUF, the multimedia ones) go into some main "ntcore" directory (ntcore, ntos, call it whatever you prefer. I'm inclined to the second name, but I'm ok with the first one). - the keyboard layouts can be moved either to win32ss/ or to / (in case we can give sense to keyboard layouts in "pure" NT, for example when we run usetup, etc...) - ok... my already-done (but revertable) modifs from 66575 (directory renamings can be done, it's not set in stone). - putting all printing support in some /win32/printsup (or "printing"...) directory : that means: localspl, ntprint, printui, spoolsv and spoolss, and winspool (so far...) That's what I'm 99.99% sure (and what I think is quite clear). Concerning the rest (that can create discussion) I still keep it in old directories. Regards, Hermès. -Message d'origine- De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey Bragin Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 00:15 À : ros-dev@reactos.org Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM Hermes, What the fuck, may I ask? I don't understand since when we started doing big changes in trunk without talking (or listening) to anyone at all, just at your own discretion? Are you so sure the change is accepted by majority of our developers? Did you get approval of those devs? Give them some respect which they earned ove
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Hi, So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything, even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA! In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here: http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html . At that time the main argument was that we were also in the middle of changing the old build system (rbuild) to a new one (cmake) so it was problematic to do those two big changes at once. Also at that time, seeing the argumentation of Ged, Timo, Jérôme and the few others (active developers) who dared to participate to this discussion, it was clear that a tree restructure was necessary anyway, sooner or later. In 2012 some tree restructure happened (r56305) by moving around and in a more logical manner some core components of win32. What happens now in 2015, i.e. 5 years after ? We have CMake well established, everything works, but only win32 core was reorganized. I made http://jira.reactos.org/browse/CORE-9111 , people started to give proposals. You came back with the almost same argument, that is to finish the existing things first (adapt that: at the time of CMake, it was CMake, now, it's fix all ReactOS 0.4 bugs), and then improve structure of source tree. Since not all the existing bugs will be fixed by then, we can continue this way and wait another 5 years in order to have a real tree restructure? I don't think so. So I took that for granted and committed r66575. Active developers really think (at least, myself) it's a pain in the *** that when we code on some given module (example: shell), we need to modify some bit of code in base/shell/whatever, some bit of code in dll/win32/shell32, some bit of code here and there. All the code of the shell should be tied together. This goes also for everything else: the core of NT (kernel, ntdll, "base" drivers...), the win32 subsystem (win32k; for it the change in r56305 started to make things more logical: you would not have to modify code in some win32k/ directory while also changing dll/win32/gdi32 or dll/win32/user32 that were by the way amongst all the rest of wine dlls, etc...) . Because I didn't want to wait yet another 5 years I decided to start something. OK my fault I would have to get a synthesis of the different proposals of tree restructures I got, then put in ros-dev, then wait 1 month until everybody starts to vote. Of course you would get people thinking it's better to do à la Wine and sort the files by extension type (that's what we almost have currently) and it was already repeated that it is BAD because it doesn't translate the fact that ROS/windows is built by modules; others would have thought it's nice to have this piece of thing next to another one whereas this can be postponed later on until the *obvious* parts of code have been properly packed together. And because of that, here is my proposal: UNTIL details get fixed, I propose to: - keep the /boot/, /include/, /lib/, /media/ and /tools/ directories (as well as /cmake/ and the files in / ) untouched. - ntoskrnl, ntdll and the drivers we have in /drivers/ (SAUF, the multimedia ones) go into some main "ntcore" directory (ntcore, ntos, call it whatever you prefer. I'm inclined to the second name, but I'm ok with the first one). - the keyboard layouts can be moved either to win32ss/ or to / (in case we can give sense to keyboard layouts in "pure" NT, for example when we run usetup, etc...) - ok... my already-done (but revertable) modifs from 66575 (directory renamings can be done, it's not set in stone). - putting all printing support in some /win32/printsup (or "printing"...) directory : that means: localspl, ntprint, printui, spoolsv and spoolss, and winspool (so far...) That's what I'm 99.99% sure (and what I think is quite clear). Concerning the rest (that can create discussion) I still keep it in old directories. Regards, Hermès. -Message d'origine- De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey Bragin Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 00:15 À : ros-dev@reactos.org Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM Hermes, What the fuck, may I ask? I don't understand since when we started doing big changes in trunk without talking (or listening) to anyone at all, just at your own discretion? Are you so sure the change is accepted by majority of our developers? Did you get approval of those devs? Give them some respect which they earned over years with their skills and commitment. I understand ReactOS is a very loosely managed project (to favor ease of development), but totally ignoring everyone? I ch
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
I guess Hermès wants to prove how good svn, git or whatever we use as CVS are when it comes to merging. That said, I will kill anyone moving a single iota in ntoskrnl, includes and drivers. You've all been warned. Le 06/03/2015 00:14, Aleksey Bragin a écrit : Hermes, What the fuck, may I ask? I don't understand since when we started doing big changes in trunk without talking (or listening) to anyone at all, just at your own discretion? Are you so sure the change is accepted by majority of our developers? Did you get approval of those devs? Give them some respect which they earned over years with their skills and commitment. I understand ReactOS is a very loosely managed project (to favor ease of development), but totally ignoring everyone? I checked CORE-9111 and I don't see any single comment from Timo, Jerome, James, whoever else counts. Regards, Aleksey Bragin P.S. I'm not talking about actual changes, I'm talking about the process and attitude. On 06.03.2015 2:03, hbelu...@svn.reactos.org wrote: Author: hbelusca Date: Thu Mar 5 23:03:33 2015 New Revision: 66575 URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575&view=rev Log: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM ___ 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
Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Hermes, What the fuck, may I ask? I don't understand since when we started doing big changes in trunk without talking (or listening) to anyone at all, just at your own discretion? Are you so sure the change is accepted by majority of our developers? Did you get approval of those devs? Give them some respect which they earned over years with their skills and commitment. I understand ReactOS is a very loosely managed project (to favor ease of development), but totally ignoring everyone? I checked CORE-9111 and I don't see any single comment from Timo, Jerome, James, whoever else counts. Regards, Aleksey Bragin P.S. I'm not talking about actual changes, I'm talking about the process and attitude. On 06.03.2015 2:03, hbelu...@svn.reactos.org wrote: Author: hbelusca Date: Thu Mar 5 23:03:33 2015 New Revision: 66575 URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575&view=rev Log: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM ___ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
