1 Feb
2006
1 Feb
'06
8:25 a.m.
art yerkes wrote:
I completely agree with this. Some of the rules being proposed seem to be a
little over cautious.
This 'shake up' shouldn't put a strangle hold on the project.
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
Which is of
course fine, but since ReactOS has no use for
it, why commit it?
It isn't needed to meet the goals of
ReactOS.
Casper
I don't agree with this sentiment at all. We've always
before been proactive
about implementing at least visible parts of the API to make
it more likely
that applications we didn't know about would have a chance to
work. I think
that's a reasonable way to work, especially if you're working
in an area you've
got a good understanding of.