The whole idea of the tree reorganization is to actually have: 1) /reactos: The bare minimum system, which is able to boot (into explorer). No added-values are in this tree (system can work without downloader, paint brush and something else). 2) /rosapps: Not a thrash-can where unused stuff goes (which it looks like now), but properly setup tree, which most people will compile together with /reactos, will provide all the nice things we already have - downloader, imagesoft, etc, etc. Those utils are great and definately needed to make the system actually look like a working and kind of usable system. 3) (maybe?) /rostests: IMO, having tests in rosapps is not the best thing, because I would want to construct my own WC that way so I can develop/try tests without compiling all applications too. So another tree is proposed to contain all tests we have developed so far, plus winetests, plus all tests from rosapps too.
Again, most people should be at least the first two, if not all three. Only core devs in some cases (like kernel dev, device driver development, bootloader work), who can't afford to spend 30 minutes recompiling the tree (my Core Duo spends 30 minutes to recompile / reactos without additional modules now) should use the 1) or 1)+3) options.
With the best regards, Aleksey Bragin.
On Feb 7, 2007, at 6:52 AM, Timo Kreuzer wrote:
I would agree on most of that.
I would vote for keeping downloader in the tree, because it's small and gives a good view on what should work on ROS for people testing the builds. And it's easier than mounting/editing the image and copying the files. imagesoft could stay in the tree, as we don't have a paint clone or a picture viewer.