Re: [ros-dev] rosapps

[Komarov Alexey]

I think, that detachment of stuff which is vital for the system to work 
minimally will lead to reduce compilation time on the one hand, but also 
will lead:
1. Reduction quantity of tests for the components removed from 
trunk/reactos. That's bad for that components.
2. Components similar to those present in Windows, but not vital for the 
boot process, allow to test other parts ReactOS, revealing errors in 
shell32, kernel etc.

I against to remove such components from trunk/reactos, but I'm not 
developer. You decide.

q4a.
>   So, are there any objections in separating thirdparty,
> additional, 
>  sometimes helpful stuff into addons module, and having all apps which 
>  exist in Windows, but aren't required for booting into rosapps?
>
>  Please, let's come to a solution, because having such a trash can 
>  which rosapps is now is unbearable.
>
>
>  WBR,
>  Aleksey Bragin.
>
>  On Mar 9, 2009, at 2:50 AM, Ged wrote:
>
> > I would opt for deleting everything in rosapps.
> >
> > I’m not really sure why it’s important to start rearranging it as 
> > there’s very little of use in there.
> >
> >  
> >
> > As per our project mandate we aren’t interested in anything which 
> > isn’t core.
> >
> >  
> >
> > Ged.
> >
> >  
> >
> >  
> >
> > *From:* ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.org 
> > [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *Aleksey Bragin
> > *Sent:* 08 March 2009 18:16
> > *To:* ReactOS Development List
> > *Subject:* Re: [ros-dev] rosapps
> >
> >  
> >
> > I'll explain his idea.
> >
> >  
> >
> > The idea he would likes to propose is to separate the mess inside 
> > rosapps, and provide a clear division of what goes where:
> >
> > 1. trunk/reactos contains ONLY stuff which is vital for the system to 
> > work minimally. Including explorer, GUI, and things like that, but 
> > without calculator, solitaire, or anything like that.
> >
> > 2. rosapps - components similar to those present in Windows, but not 
> > vital for the boot process.
> >
> > 3. addons - components, which are additional to the base set of apps 
> > and drivers Windows ships with.
> >
> >  
> >
> > Comments are welcome on his idea.
> >
> >  
> >
> > My own comment is that the idea seems to recall what we originally 
> > been discussing a year or more ago, but stopped caring as more devs 
> > got more powerful PCs. There is no strict solution on what goes where 
> > now, actually that's why his idea started - he proposed to move 
> > winver and winhlp back to trunk, and I was arguing over it.
> >
> >  
> >
> >  
> >
> > WBR,
> >
> > Aleksey Bragin.
> >
> >  
> >
> >  
> >
> > On Mar 8, 2009, at 7:02 PM, Zachary Gorden wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Huh?  The rosapps module isn't included by default in the build to 
> > begin with, so how does it decrease build time?  Also, the 
> > applications in there are supposed to be providing equivalent 
> > functionality found in Windows.  Downloader is an exception, but what 
> > else is?
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Dmitry Chapyshev <lentind(a)yandex.ru 
> > <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > I suggest to divide rosapps on two parts:
> >
> > 1) Components which are present in Windows (rosapps)
> > 2) 3rd party components (3rdapps)
> >
> > In rosapps it is necessary to place all components without which the
> > system can normally work (calc, hh, winhlp32, charmap, games and etc)
> >
> > In 3rdapps components which are not present in Windows (downloader,
> > imagesoft and etc) will take places
> >
> > Such placing of components will allow to reduce compilation time as you
> > can not compile not the modules necessary to you (rosapps and/or 3rdapps)
> >
> > Please tell your opinion on my proposition.
> >