Steven Edwards wrote:
--- Jonathan Wilson <jonwil(a)tpgi.com.au> wrote:
Are we going to actually get permission to
re-licence then submit all
the
w23api changes back to w32api?
Unless its its on MSDN or something thats undocumented that you can
find via a simple google search then the w32api people will not accept
it. As far as I care we should just maintain our own SDK based on the
Wine headers, The DDK based on the Mingw DDK and our own NDK for the
undocumented stuff.
Most of what is in the WINE headers is the stuff that is in the
"platform
SDK" and then "the undocumented stuff".
Keeping the "undocumented" stuff (i.e. the bits microsoft doesnt document
in the Platform SDK) and the "documented" stuff seperate (i.e. putting the
undocumented stuff into seperate headers) is a good idea IMO. (e.g. have a
"userundoc.h" for the undocumented stuff or whatever)
And if we are doing that, we can (if people will re-licence) contribute the
documented stuff (all of which is in the MS platform SDK or the DDK) back
to w32api itself to make w32api into something that gets 1 step closer to
the Platform SDK/DDK (IMO thats what w32api should be aiming at, a clone of
anything in the microsoft Platform SDK that someone wants to cleanroom
clone and also anything in the DDK that anyone wants to cleanroom clone)
Anyone else think that keeping the undocumented stuff seperate from the
regular documented stuff is a good idea? bad idea?