4 Dec
2005
4 Dec
'05
6:08 p.m.
Alex Ionescu wrote:
I now have a local SVN setup to handle my incremental
patches. Other
developers do not. Other developers still commit code in one single huge
commit, yet you don't complain about it.
You don't anymore which is a good thing, I shouldn't have brought this
up again because it's no longer current.
You no longer work on the kernel because you don't
have a lot of time on
your hands; you've told me yourself. I think you're being a bit
hypocritcal with your argument. You commited a pretty large handle table
implementation which we talked about at length. You made it clear it was
not Windows internal compatible. What were my comments? Did I not praise
you for it? Did I not appreciate you for it? It's been in the tree for a
year. Have I ever made an attempt to "rewrite it"? Did I ever said I would?
The time issue is rather recent. But seeing what other parts of the
kernel have completely be "rewritten" (don't get me wrong, it's not a
bad thing) makes me thinking that if I write a not-so-close-to-MS
implementation, there's a good chance it will be completley replaced
anytime soon, so why start at all. This might not be true but this is
the impression I got over the last year or so.
How about when I asked you to improve it with some new
code. What was
your response? It was "I don't have time with university", not "you
want
it to be perfect, like windows".
Again, time is a recent issue.
Yes, I hated your Object Capture patch because it
wasn't using a public
capture structure and we got into a big argument about it, but you might
want to remember how much I've appreciated and loved your ExHandle patch.
I just don't understand the point in duplicating a completely internal
function just because there's on structure (accidently?) made public
that can't even be used by 3rd party software. I wouldn't have cared
much if the new version didn't introduce so many bugs. However, that's
history and I don't think it's about loving or hating someone else's
patches.
I never had anything to do with win32k. I barely know
how it works, and
you had win32k rewrites ongoing before I even joined the project. How
can you possibly blame this on me, when you publically stated OTHER
reasons for dropping win32k?
You said that you think it's important to make the (completely
undocumented) system calls to win32k (NtUser, NtGdi) binary compatible.
I absolutely don't agree with this because there's no need for doing
this. However, I do agree with you on NtD3d and NtDd because those are
actually documented. And I don't blame you on this, there's other more
important reasons, that's why i said "one of the reasons".
You aren't seriously bringing this up are you.
What's next? An email to
KJK saying "Cheesecake is not the official food of ReactOS damn it, I
HATE CHEESECAKE!!!"?
I'm bringing this up because I find it extremely annoying, about as much
annoying as those "links" posted from time to time. Gladly that seems to
have reduced recently. Sorry, but it just adds up when everytime you
look at the irc channel it's all about Cutler. There are also other
issues that I found annoying, and I'm certain that there are many things
people find annoying about me as well. We all have our flaws.
I just wrote down what bothered me, I wouldn't have done it if you
hadn't "begged" for it. I'm also sorry that sometimes I tend to be
rather resentful and dig out old issues. I don't intend to comment
further on this topic as it most likely would lead to unnecessary
disagreements (again). I assumed that you also expected critizism when
posting about such a sensitive topic.
- Thomas