19 Nov
2008
19 Nov
'08
2:42 a.m.
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 7:40 AM, Aleksey Bragin <aleksey(a)reactos.org> wrote:
On Nov 17, 2008, at 4:20 PM, gedmurphy wrote:
Pointing out the source of the code is a correct practice... I will
start posting everything for now on and trust me wine'ies and code
weevils will still complain. See, they do not what this project to out
shine theirs and this is pushing the issue though their back door (Mr.
Edwards) which by the way is bring up these points. I need help and no
one is helping me and I'm doing this work for free and I do not want
to be known and this kills the code weevils pride. code weevils owe us
big time for creating this mess in the first place. They used the bock
door in the past and now pushing it through again and again. They
created the audit to kick us out of the game and now they see us again
as competition in a market place that has no buyers.
At this moment we have member that do not code very much making
decisions and creating changes to this project with out our input.
Tell me, is that fair?
For members of this project that do help, I give you great thanks! We need it!
James
Steven has repeatedly asked for credit, and I
quote:
" Please add the appropriate copyright headers to the source file
stating the original author when implementing code based on third
party sources."
There is one concern about it: how to find a proper author for a
specific function he is copying? We can look at the top of the file,
but there are a number of people listed there, possibly responsible
for different parts of the file. Should he review all Wine commits
and pick an author of the patch? What if the specific function was
patched later by a few authors?
Is there a reason for not doing it this time?
Secondly, why are things being implemented in stubs?
There is same stuff in gdi32
stub.c having a few implemented
functions, iirc. Not very good decision, but as long as people
responsible remember about this.. and keep moving it to appropriate
places, I don't mind.
WBR,
Aleksey.