Has anyone looked at the Haiku Project lately. There hasn't been much
change in status but I do think the status page has a great graph
that reactos should implement.
http://haiku-os.org/learn.php?
mode=status&haikuusersession=80b7ab5450deadb0c18c136376ee33d0
This is a script you can use to switch your current repository to the
new one. It won't save much dl time at this point, but might help.
It's experimental, and it might claim that some directories 'already
exist'. If so, you have to delete the old version of the directory.
Of course, you'll be able to get your diffs out by doing svn diff on
those directories beforehand.
In any case, use with caution.
run like this
python change-repo.py <reactos-dir> svn://svn.reactos.com/trunk/reactos svn://svn.reactos.ru/reactos/trunk/reactos 97493ccd-5924-5043-b1f5-66cb403b36ce
--
Discordant is the murmur at such treading down of lovely things while
god's most lordly gift to man is decency of mind. Call that man only
blest who has in sweet tranquility brought his life to close.
If only I could act as such, my hope is good.
-- Aeschylus' Agamemnon (translated by H. W. Smyth)
--
Discordant is the murmur at such treading down of lovely things while
god's most lordly gift to man is decency of mind. Call that man only
blest who has in sweet tranquility brought his life to close.
If only I could act as such, my hope is good.
-- Aeschylus' Agamemnon (translated by H. W. Smyth)
Hello!
As for recent changes with SVN repository hosting, the active ReactOS
repository now is being placed on svn://svn.reactos.ru/reactos.
I thought it would be wise not to copy passwords from the old
repository, so
All developers with commit access, please send me your exact matching
svn commit name (though I can look it up easily of course ;-)) and a
password you would like to use in the repository.
Right now there is only directory/files moving operations are going,
without any features being added or deleted until the voting on files-
locks in SVN for non-audited parts will be resolved.
This doesn't touch modules which are clean apriori - like rbuild for
example.
Thank you,
Aleksey Bragin.
At 15:11 17/02/2006 -0000, you wrote:
I apologize for this second intrusion, but i have some difficulties
to really understand this:
>Define 'MS code'. If we're talking about leaked source code, then that is
>true.
But you said elsewhere that there was _no_ leaked source, so that
the only problem should be with your next words:
>If we're talking about small chunks of assembly from dissasembled MS
>binaries, then that is what the audit hopes to uncover and remove. Once the
>audit is complete, we can also say we know this to be true, at the moment we
>don't know.
... and this one sounds strange to me, because i saw several messages
talking in terms of *year* (?!), for the audit.
Well, i just downloaded the ReactOS Sources, and searched for all the
Files having an "__asm__" Statements inside, after having saved in a
dedicated Directory, the folders: bootdata / Drivers / hal / include /
lin / media / modules / ntoskrnl / regtests / services / subsys and
win32api.
I did not considered the other ones because, for example, i suppose
that there can be no "problem" with the [apps] Folder. ;)
The search of the Files with "_asm_" inside shows only around 80 Files
found. Opening several of these Files, shows that the occurencies of
"_asm_" seem to be from 1 to, say, 10. Most usually around 2 or 3. It
also shows that many of these Statements cannot be any problem. Example:
{
__asm__("int $3\n\t" : /* no outputs */ : /* no inputs */)
}
Some other ones, a little bit more significative look like, for
example:
__asm
{
mov edx, Port
mov edi, Buffer
mov ecx, Count
cld
rep ins byte ptr[edi], dx
}
... that do not seem to me big enough for demonstrating anything,
particulary not for a so trivial code... Not considering that most
of the ones i saw, were simple LOCK or INT instructions, and the like,
that do not even diserve a reading.
I did not search inside _all_ files, but i had to search inside many,
(say, 1/3), before i could point out an Asm Routine with more than 10
Instructions...
I stopped there, because i said to me that it was stupid to read that
way, and that i was possibly missing the Files of real interrest for
the Audit. But all i have seen does not explain to me, how it could
ever take one year for proof-reading so few, and so small, "__asm__"
statements.
What am i missing?
Betov.
< http://rosasm.org >
Hi!
I am now very confused.
It seems for me, that the current informations about ReactOS´s situation is
poor. And if there existing informations, they are IMHO contradictorily.
On 27.1.2006 Steven Edwards wrote "Reset, Reboot, Restart, legal issues and
the long road to 0.3"
http://www.reactos.org/xhtml/de/news_page_14.html
In this text there is no word about leaked Windows-code. So it seems, that
the main problem is revers engineering, which is not clean room rev. eng.
One day later a developer says in the forum
http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=13239&highlight=#13239
"The biggest problem isn't disassembled code. The fact is that 4 of the
developers have had a copy of the leaked Windows source."
So, the biggest problem is, that some ROS-developer have looked in leaked
code.
He have said that, and nobody have contradicted it.
But at
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/007832.html
a developer says to me
"The leaked source code was never an issue here, that was an escalation of
the mail which was posted on the public list. The rumours which materialized
from that were unfounded and untrue."
and the cvs tree will be completly re-opend.
In an other mail, I don't find it at the moment, anybody says, that there is
still no Microsoft-Code found in ROS. All is clean.
On the following
http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2006-February/007717.html
a developer says
"I am told that the sources for FreeLdr are all okay, except for the
some of the bootsectors having been pretty much just disassembled from
MS's. Is this true?"
The answer comes from an other developer
http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2006-February/007722.html
"crashfourit has posted a patch here:"
That means, that it is possible, that MS-bootsector-code have found the way
in ROS, if I understood it right.
And at
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-general/2006-February/002128.html
somebody cite something where a Codewaever chef says, that in ROS is stolen
code.
I have at the current no links, but I have the feeling, that there existing
a lot of more comments like these, which me all confused very much.
And then ReactOS gives for me more questions then answers.
What does the Audit-process mean?
You have - as somebody says - already seen, that no Windows-Code is in
ReactOS.
But you want with the audit look for code, which are integrated by (not
clean room) reverse engineering.
But how do you want to find it?
The clean room inverse enginering is like re-writing an existing book,
without reading the existing book itself. Only reading review, critiques and
summaries about the book are alowed to read.
But there existing some people who have reverse enginered, but not clean
room. This is like someone, who have completly read the book itself and
tries to write the book what he read then down in mind.
But how do you want to become out, who have read the original book and who
not?
Steve Edwars have written "and the long road to 0.3". Is it still true, that
it needs now longer, until 0.3 comes out? The tree will already be opend.
Does it mean, that 0.3 comes only after the end of the audit-progess out? If
this is true, comes then before the end of the audit other releases out
(0.2.10, 0.2.11, .... etc) ?
You see. I am very confused.
I don't expect that you answer to my mail here.
I only want, that your public clarification,
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/007832.html
Murphy have written "The whole tree will be reopened in the state it was in
before it closed.
More details will follow when this happens.", will really clarify all. So
that no longer confuseness for anyone exists.
Greatings
theuserbl
theUser BL wrote:
> I am now very confused.
I'll try and clear some other areas up for you.
I don't have web access at the moment, so I am only going off what you have
pasted under the links.
> On 27.1.2006 Steven Edwards wrote "Reset, Reboot, Restart,
> legal issues and
> the long road to 0.3"
> http://www.reactos.org/xhtml/de/news_page_14.html
>
> In this text there is no word about leaked Windows-code. So
> it seems, that
> the main problem is revers engineering, which is not clean
> room rev. eng.
Correct.
> One day later a developer says in the forum
> http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=13239&highlight=#13239
> "The biggest problem isn't disassembled code. The fact is
> that 4 of the
> developers have had a copy of the leaked Windows source."
>
> So, the biggest problem is, that some ROS-developer have
> looked in leaked
> code.
This isn't much of a problem, the problem is the integrity / validity of our
code.
i.e. how was the information to write the code obtained.
See above.
> But at
> http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/0
> 07832.html
> a developer says to me
> "The leaked source code was never an issue here, that was an
> escalation of
> the mail which was posted on the public list. The rumours
> which materialized
> from that were unfounded and untrue."
Correct.
> In an other mail, I don't find it at the moment, anybody
> says, that there is
> still no Microsoft-Code found in ROS. All is clean.
Define 'MS code'. If we're talking about leaked source code, then that is
true.
If we're talking about small chunks of assembly from dissasembled MS
binaries, then that is what the audit hopes to uncover and remove. Once the
audit is complete, we can also say we know this to be true, at the moment we
don't know.
> On the following
> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2006-February/007717.html
> a developer says
> "I am told that the sources for FreeLdr are all okay, except for the
> some of the bootsectors having been pretty much just disassembled from
> MS's. Is this true?"
> The answer comes from an other developer
> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2006-February/007722.html
> "crashfourit has posted a patch here:"
>
> That means, that it is possible, that MS-bootsector-code have
> found the way
> in ROS, if I understood it right.
This code hasn't been audited yet. It's possible that parts of the
bootsector have been derrived from an MS dissasembly. The audit will reveal
the answer, and it will be rewritten if nessesary.
> And at
> http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-general/2006-Februa
> ry/002128.html
> somebody cite something where a Codewaever chef says, that in
> ROS is stolen
> code.
Incorrect. There is no stolen code in ROS and more than there is stolen code
in Wine.
> And then ReactOS gives for me more questions then answers.
>
> What does the Audit-process mean?
It means all suspect code will be proof-read and documentation must be made
available to prove it's validity.
If not, the will be either rewritten, docs written or removed dependant on
the circumstances.
> You have - as somebody says - already seen, that no
> Windows-Code is in
> ReactOS.
> But you want with the audit look for code, which are
> integrated by (not
> clean room) reverse engineering.
> But how do you want to find it?
Any code that is questionable. i.e. a reason cannot be found as to why it is
included.
I agree it's difficult to tell what is clean room and what it not.
As KJK said, if we don't question it's validity as all appears well, then it
would be up to a 3rd party to proove otherwise.
> Steve Edwars have written "and the long road to 0.3". Is it
> still true, that
> it needs now longer, until 0.3 comes out? The tree will
> already be opend.
> Does it mean, that 0.3 comes only after the end of the
> audit-progess out? If
> this is true, comes then before the end of the audit other
> releases out
> (0.2.10, 0.2.11, .... etc) ?
Decisions on new policies havn't been reached yet.
It's true that it is still a long road. The audit is still going to happen,
it's just that we're doing it in a slightly different way now.
It is hoped that this new method will ensure the project stays alive during
the audit.
> You see. I am very confused.
I hope that cleared some things up for you.
> http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/007832.html
> Murphy have written "The whole tree will be reopened in the state it was
in
> before it closed.
> More details will follow when this happens.", will really clarify all. So
> that no longer confuseness for anyone exists.
The current vote will decide the outcome of that. There are currently 2
options.
Read the mail entitled 'Vote: Code Auditing' for more details.
Regards,
Ged.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
At 20:21 17/02/2006 +0100, you wrote:
>I think this only applies to the bootsector, wich has asm directly taken
>from disassemblies in it.
Ah. Then it should be the [Boot] sector. I see 5 files in there, with
asm statements. Only one could be a problem, that is named "longhorm.h".
52,000 Bytes long // 105 "_asm__". Outchhhh...
But did not another guy said that there was a possibility of complete
replacement? And, if i miss-undertood, or if not possible, would it
take one year for proof-reading 52,000 bytes of C Source?
>I think what Ged was talking about was disassemblies converted into C.
>And this can be found by looking for typical things of that kind of code:
>- Magical number inside C code. Normally constants are used or the
>numbers are commented or really obvios. But when you don't know why
>there's a constant 0x2342 then you don't really know how to call it. In
>disc.c there's a constant called PARTITION_MAGIC ;-)
>- excessive gotos: You would normally not use any gotos, but it can be
>hard to identify complex structures of for, if, while,... inside asm
>code, so you do it like it's done in asm: with gotos. It doesn't look
>good, but it works.
Ah! C simulating Assembly and hard coded unknown numbers...
OK, i see the problem better, with these points, as long as there is
really a _lot_ of Files with "goto"s inside, and i can imagine how
sorting all of these out, might be a boring task. But this was not,
at all, what was first said.
Thanks for the explanations. Betov.
Which is why I stated a couple weeks ago thaqt politics has NO place in
an engineering project.
At all.
Ever.
-----Original Message-----
From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-bounces@reactos.org]
On Behalf Of mf
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 1:55 AM
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: [ros-dev] Re: Vote: code auditing
Brandon Turner wrote:
> That was the orginal plan, and we just voted against it.
>
> Brandon
>
That's the idea with politics, you amend a proposal until the original
purpose of the proposal is completely reverted, and you end up with a
new set of useless silly rules with possible flaws, loopholes etc. If
you can't get people to accept something, just confuse them with even
more proposed rules, preferably vague but essentially the same as what
they originally voted against.
mf
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Murphy, Ged (Bolton) wrote:
> Incorrect. There is no stolen code in ROS and more than there
> is stolen code in Wine.
Sorry, that should read 'There is no stolen code in ROS _any_ more than
there is stolen code in Wine.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
theUser BL wrote:
> But at
> http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/007832.html
> a developer says to me
> "The leaked source code was never an issue here, that was an escalation of
> the mail which was posted on the public list. The rumours which
materialized
> from that were unfounded and untrue."
> and the cvs tree will be completly re-opend.
IIRC, it was me who said that. What I mean by that is that none of the
leaked Windows source code has ever found it's way into ReactOS. Many people
thought that was the case, but they were wrong.
Ged.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
I must agree. Problems can sometimes bring out the best in people and
projects. The fact that there was a minor setback will likely make the
project stronger and btter then ever, even if only by reafirming to the
project by those who have committed the most.
-----Original Message-----
From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-bounces@reactos.org]
On Behalf Of mf
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 3:09 AM
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: [ros-dev] Re: Goodbye Everyone...
Steven Edwards wrote:
> We seem to be a ship that is taking on water.
Gee, if that's the attitude our Project Coordinator, role model and
source of inspiration for the project, is taking, then I don't know what
I should think. Are you just acting this unoptimistic because you feel
like a captain who's almost got mutiny on his hands, or is it some other
reason? From everything I've seen, I'd say things are looking up lately.
But that's just my humble opinion.
mf.
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Dann B. Smith wrote:
> Hmmm... Wrong. A strong leadership can prevent the
> politicization of a
> project if handled correctly.
>
> I would like to paraphrase certain scientists here and say that if you
> have to vote on a thing, it isn't science (or engineering).
> And if it's
> science (or engineeirng), it does not (ever) need a vote.
>
> Science and engineering are based on two things: truth and
> workability
> (respectively).
>
> If that maxim can't be followed, the rest of the discussion is moot,
> since the project has already died.
It has nothing to do with Science or engineering.
It's a simple case of people having different ideas and we have to work out
which path to follow.
In a volentary project like this, how else do you propose different views
are solved?
You can't forcefully make someone do something unless you are paying them,
thus a majority vote is the only fair way.
Ged.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
Hmmm... Wrong. A strong leadership can prevent the politicization of a
project if handled correctly.
I would like to paraphrase certain scientists here and say that if you
have to vote on a thing, it isn't science (or engineering). And if it's
science (or engineeirng), it does not (ever) need a vote.
Science and engineering are based on two things: truth and workability
(respectively).
If that maxim can't be followed, the rest of the discussion is moot,
since the project has already died.
-----Original Message-----
From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-bounces@reactos.org]
On Behalf Of Murphy, Ged (Bolton)
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 4:21 AM
To: 'ReactOS Development List'
Subject: RE: [ros-dev] Goodbye Everyone...
Rick Langschultz wrote
It is inevitable that as a project grows in size and popularity, it also
becomes much more political.
Ged Murphy wrote:
> B - Sections of ReactOS which require auditing are 'locked',
> that being that the source is fully available to download and
> build, but no development work should be undertaken until
> the said code has passed the audit. The lock will be
> removed only when that section of code has been audited.
I am in agreement with proposal B, freezing of un-audited sections. Here
are my reasons:
Firstly I'll elaborate on what a lock does:
Any developer can 'get-a-lock' on a file. Having this lock means only
that developer can commit to that file*. A locked file cannot be
modified, deleted or renamed in the repository by anyone else.
To set a lock on a file, you lock it as per your client syntax and set
the subversion property svn:needs-lock. When this property is set on a
file, a checked out or updated file is made read only locally. (except
for the person who holds the lock*). This acts as a warning that the
file should not be modified. Users of Tortoise will also have a
graphical overlay stating a file is locked.
Locks can be removed by any developer in a process called
breaking-the-lock. (ownership of the lock can also be taken known as
stealing-the-lock, although that's not important for us). The ability to
Break the lock ensures that no one developer has control over the lock.
Anyone can remove a lock at any time.
Users and developers alike will not notice a lock unless they try to
modify locked code, so it would in no way inhibit general usage.
*(a user named 'audit' can be set up to do the initial locking of the
files)
What the lock would do is act as a barrier for any further development
on non-audited code. Code which has not been audited must be deemed as
'tainted' until it has passed an audit.
I do however think that what we deem as tainted can be narrowed down.
All usermode applications along with all Wine libs and many other areas
(to be discussed) will bypass the lock immediately.
Code which has not yet passed the audit should not be improved,
committed to, developed (whatever the phrase). There are 2 good reasons
for this. Firstly, there is a possibility that this code needs to be
removed, so it is a complete waste of a developers time to improve this
code.
Secondly (and most importantly), by freezing this code, it puts more of
an incentive on developers to audit it. e.g. if someone is working on
some code which requires a particular section of un-audited code to be
modified, or exposes a bug in some un-audited code, the developer must
audit the said code in order to fix the problem. Only then will they be
able to take advantage of this with their ReactOS improvement/addition.
If this code wasn't frozen, the chances are, the developer will tweak
the un-audited code and carry on regardless. Thus un-audited code will
tend to take a back seat.
I agree with Gé, in that if some method is not put in place to ensure
our code is audited, people will conveniently forget about it.
Not only must we been seen to be pro-active with the audit for the
general public to see (e.g. osnews, slashdot), but we must also ensure
we do not alienate developers who feel _very_ strongly about the
un-audited code. By reopening the repository, with the addition of
locking un-audited code, I think we can strike a fair compromise for all
parties, and ensure the audit takes place.
Ged.
> The Ros CDs loader might be useful for you too.
This did remind me we can download ros sources without using SVN.
Therefore I have the freeldr installer now,
thanks for all.
If you didnt read the mailing list since some time,
SVN code is being audited and
contains almost nothing atm for *users*.
--- Sarocet <sarocet(a)gmail.com> a écrit :
> Sorry, as you talked about old svn i thought that was your problem.
> Don't know what happened with svn, i have been disconnected of the project
> over a month.
> The data you want is (should be) probably in trunk/reactos/boot/freeldr at
> folders freeldr and install.
> I also see strange no data in branches folder.....
>
> Anyway, i can send you the freeldr folder i have on my svn copy (over a
> month and a half old). I guess better wait until get the new svn before
> updating.
> The Ros CDs loader might be useful for you too.
>
Kind regards,
Sylvain Petreolle (aka Usurp)
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Tired of a proprietary Windows on your computer ?
Use free ReactOS instead ( http://www.reactos.org )
http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1697
--
Discordant is the murmur at such treading down of lovely things while
god's most lordly gift to man is decency of mind. Call that man only
blest who has in sweet tranquility brought his life to close.
If only I could act as such, my hope is good.
-- Aeschylus' Agamemnon (translated by H. W. Smyth)
Well, it's been fun, however i believe it is time for me to leave.
ReactOS really has fallen to pieces and it's going to take a long time
(years) to get things back on track. What really annoys me about this
entire thing is that waaay back in the earlier days of ROS (before 0.1)
Things were fun. Nothing worked, but things were fun. Development on
ROS was actually HAPPENING (I know this because I myself was part of
it). Since then things started changing. New developers appeared, a
lot of flame wars were breaking out, etc. I stayed on the list, pitched
in my 2 cents, etc. Though i stopped coding for the most part. Now it
turns out that developers were using dirty room reverse engineering
tactics, or have had access to the source code. I almost left then, but
i figured i'd give it a little bit longer and see what happens. Now I
see a bunch of arguing on the mailing list, ROS development has stopped,
and I'm doubting it'll resume again for a long time, and things have
just pretty well fallen apart. Even IF the audit is completed, ROS will
likely be in pieces. It will NEVER be at the level it was before the audit.
Anyways, I believe it is time to start anew. New project, different
name, different goals.
Until Then,
Bye.
Richard Campbell
ReactOS Developer and Long Time Fan
The vote on choosing a plan for further ReactOS development is now
finished. The results are:
Plan A: 4
Plan B: 14
This means that all points from the Plan B are now in force.
Additional announcement will be made regarding the SVN repository.
For detailed read go to http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?
t=1675
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
At 15:01 16/02/2006 -0000, you wrote:
>Sorry, I'm not really sure what your question is.
>
>After being derailed recently, ReactOS is now being put back on the tracks.
>There is finally a clear path starting to emerge for development to restart.
>There will not be a fork, development work will continue on ReactOS.
>
>If any of those don't answer your question, can you try to reword it please.
:))
Don't be sorry: I am used with not being understood, and i am quite
sure that this is not because of my "particular english".
:))
Well, my question has been answered to, by the recent answers to
Hyperion post, and, mind you, if you do not understand what i write,
as a matter of fact, it seems that i understand rather well how the
things are going, because since day one of the "problem", when some
other lurkers fellows of mines were under alarm mode about it, i told
them that "the problem will not take years, but 3 months".
And if you could understand my previous question, you would
prefectly understand, also, how and why i was able to predict
the exact time that it would take, before yourselves, whereas
i do not even write C.
:))
Betov.
< http://rosasm.org >
Juan Rodriguez wrote:
> I totally agree with Hyperion, not to mention that even the
> last version
> was far away from beeing really usable/stable as an os should
> be at least.
> I know there is much work that has been done, but as i recall the
> project was to make an os able of beeing an alternative to windows
> itself, politics and such, are matters that should be
> discusssed after
> the project has taken form, and imho it is not. So lets code and stop
> bitching about politics.
Great, you should join the project and solve all our problems.
I wish we had realised sooner that the answer was so simple.
We could have saved all this mess if we had known the way to avoid issues is
to shut up and continue coding.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
... wrote:
> I have seen enough of such scaring horrors, like Anti-GPL, and/or
> Right-Wing guys, contributing to ReactOS, to understand the reasons
> why the true words were not said, but, at this point, i really would
> like to know where the things are going to, and if a dissident Project
> is to be started, the correct political and ethical way, or if the
> same Project is taking a correct path, i would like to see, at least,
> a "White Paper" for it. Having seen volunnteers saying that "using
> GPLed-compatible Dev-Tools was not a necessity" (Hyperion, if i recall
> well), or pure horrors like "In the future we may have collaborations
> with MicroSoft" (Alex, taking publicly the defense of a Neo-Nazi,
> against... me -???!!!...-), for example, are things that made me
> really sea-sick.
>
> Personaly, i am not interrested with knowing if unfair Code was
> implemented or not (knowing of the individual, this is not any
> surprise to me, by the way). What i wish to know is:
>
> Will the political and ethical lessons be understood? Or not?
>
> [By the way, the simple fact of having to ask such a question,
> about such an important GPLed Project, like what ReactOS is,
> is already a pure scandal to me: I shouldn't even have to ask]
Sorry, I'm not really sure what your question is.
After being derailed recently, ReactOS is now being put back on the tracks.
There is finally a clear path starting to emerge for development to restart.
There will not be a fork, development work will continue on ReactOS.
If any of those don't answer your question, can you try to reword it please.
Ged.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
theUser BL wrote
> That would be nice.
> If you restore the old cvs-tree, before the Windows-code
> leaked (ca. 7. Feb.
> 2003) and before the people who have readed the code joined
> ReactOS, then
> there existing legal ReactOS-code, which you can published.
No, you misunderstood.
The whole tree will be reopened in the state it was in before it closed.
More details will follow when this happens.
The leaked source code was never an issue here, that was an escalation of
the mail which was posted on the public list. The rumours which materialized
from that were unfounded and untrue.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
>The only consolation I can give you is that the old tree will be restored
>somewhere as per the vote. From there auditing should take place.
That would be nice.
If you restore the old cvs-tree, before the Windows-code leaked (ca. 7. Feb.
2003) and before the people who have readed the code joined ReactOS, then
there existing legal ReactOS-code, which you can published.
That is what is needed!
At the moment you have deleted all. There existing no longer any code. The
look at the future is to look behind, which code can be let in and which
not.
But if you publish old code, then there is a point from which on the
ReactOS-developer - like Richard - can again developing forward.
Greatings
theuserbl
At 10:20 16/02/2006 -0000, you wrote:
>It is inevitable that as a project grows in size and popularity, it also
>becomes much more political. [...]
>
>There is no getting away from the fact that politics would eventually
>emerge, it was going to happen some day.
I am a lurker, here. I started a GPLed project -completely outside
ReactOS, but conditioned to the existence of ReactoS- the first day
i heard of the ReactOS Project. In other words, i work _for_ reactOS
Environment, and not _for_ Windows, and along all of these years of
developments (I started in 1998), i always took a particular care of
locking my own work, so that it could not be extended and re-used,
in case the ReactOS Project would collapse.
I am used to not post anything, here, as long as i consider that,
as i do not contribute to anything in the ReactOS developments, i
just have the right to shut-up and thank for having the right for
reading. Nevertheless, with the actual events, it seems to me that,
we -the external lurkers- have natural rights to be informed about
the _real_ political and ethical concerns.
I have seen enough of such scaring horrors, like Anti-GPL, and/or
Right-Wing guys, contributing to ReactOS, to understand the reasons
why the true words were not said, but, at this point, i really would
like to know where the things are going to, and if a dissident Project
is to be started, the correct political and ethical way, or if the
same Project is taking a correct path, i would like to see, at least,
a "White Paper" for it. Having seen volunnteers saying that "using
GPLed-compatible Dev-Tools was not a necessity" (Hyperion, if i recall
well), or pure horrors like "In the future we may have collaborations
with MicroSoft" (Alex, taking publicly the defense of a Neo-Nazi,
against... me -???!!!...-), for example, are things that made me
really sea-sick.
Personaly, i am not interrested with knowing if unfair Code was
implemented or not (knowing of the individual, this is not any
surprise to me, by the way). What i wish to know is:
Will the political and ethical lessons be understood? Or not?
[By the way, the simple fact of having to ask such a question,
about such an important GPLed Project, like what ReactOS is,
is already a pure scandal to me: I shouldn't even have to ask]
Betov.
< http://rosasm.org >
Rick Langschultz wrote
> It seems that many people want to give up the project, which would be
> a total loss of time and energy of those who have spent many hours
> and money on the project.
I agree that it has looked like that on occasions, however I assure you that
is not the case :)
It is inevitable that as a project grows in size and popularity, it also
becomes much more political. There is no avoiding the fact that the ReactOS
of today is a very different environment from what it was. This change leads
to many of the original developers viewing the project of losing the aspect
of fun which it used to have. As a consequence, many are leaving the project
which, is a sad and unfortunate outcome.
There is no getting away from the fact that politics would eventually
emerge, it was going to happen some day. All big project have this barrier
to battle with, and that day has arrived ReactOS too. However with project
growth bringing the unfortunate addition of politics, it also brings the
welcome addition of excitement and maturity. End users now have something to
try out, we even have firefox and thinderbird running now :-D
This level of maturity should ensure the survival of ReactOS, even if there
are huge mountains to climb every so often.
Hope that raises a few spirits, keep your eye on ReactOS this weekend ;)
Ged.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
