jwalsh(a)bigpond.net.au wrote:
> I'll switch to private mode, so as not to annoy the ros-general list.
> It is a little off topic.
I don't think that's a good idea, especially when I keep getting
annoying spam approval emails which I won't approve.
> I'll choose three references which I feel, by and large, describe the API.
> The first also includes a reference to wine:
> 1. http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/a/ap/application_programming_…
> 2. http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/o/os/osi_model2.htm
> 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layer_2
I do know the OSI model and I do know what APIs are. I however don't
know what exactly the UAPI is supposed to be. We're working on a windows
compatible operating system. We do not plan to add ReactOS-specific
APIs, so whatever UAPI is, unless it's an API provided by Windows,
there's a low chance we'd ever implement it into the core code base.
> What we expect to do, is study the "rats nest" of protocols and reduces them to a single Universal OSI Standard. We believer that hardware must dance to the tune of software, not the opposite.
> We have some success at the Application Layer (level 7) already.
> Here we can reduce many hundreds of applications to a single application, automatically.
> Then we simply print of the "blueprint" i.e. Application Requirements Definition (ARD).
> We then simply pass the ARD to the programmers to be put into code.
> This way we have turned a medievel like craft into an industrial process.
> In fact we are preparing to generate the code directly from the text based ARD.
We can't change existing hardware, ReactOS is supposed to work on the
existing platforms. What you described is extremely theoretical, I still
don't really know what it is supposed to be. Most of us - i think - are
more practical people, give us the detailed description of how the API
is supposed to look like and what it should provide and we can do it.
Discussing theories about APIs that don't exist (in Windows) doesn't
make much sense I think.
> We have reduced application development from months-years to hours-days.
That's great, for ReactOS this is just not going to work.
> Unfortunately, no matter how perfect our design is, it can only be as good as the weakest link.
> We've found that weakest link hidden in the API itself, outside of our control.
> Of course the hardware providers will not be happy with this development.
Which leads to the question whether hardware depends on software or the
other way around...
> Neither will the software providers who write the drivers.
> It must be, if it is to be backward (and forward) compatible, transparent to the any and every application.
> Wine, in a sense is trying to acheive the same thing, by not trying to create a single standard, but merely an API adapter.
Wine is all about creating a compatible implementation of the Win32 API.
> Sorry again for being so long winded.
> Hope that explains it
Not really, sorry ;)
So my final question about this - and I don't plan to spend any more
time about this - is: Is this UAPI thing just a theory or actually an
API that exists?
- Thomas
Thanks Thomas, for your frankness.
I hope that this bit is true anyway.
> Money can't fix everything, sometimes better decisions would help.
We don't have any money either, so our decisions must be perfect.
If we do build this UAPI, it's GNU gpl that's for sure.
Good Luck and Success
Justin
---- Thomas Weidenmueller <thomas(a)reactsoft.com> wrote:
> jwalsh(a)bigpond.net.au wrote:
> > The Original Windows is having anormous problems fighting off Virus and Malware.
> > It is known that it's vunerability is builtin to its original design i.e. the TSR.
> > Where does the ROS current design correct that inherent problem?
>
> If we can't run viruses designed for windows (except those exploiting
> bugs), the level of compatibility is rather low...
>
> > If ROS is short staffed now how bad is it going to get, if and when things do take off.
>
> We're not going to have an OS that I would consider stable in the near
> future. There are bugs and flaws everywhere you look, kind of the same
> problem that wine has.
>
> > If a multi billion dollar enterprise cannot stop it how can ROS stop it?
> > This is not a trivial question.
>
> Money can't fix everything, sometimes better decisions would help.
>
> - Thomas
> _______________________________________________
> ros-general mailing list
> ros-general(a)reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
Hi Al.
Please correct me if I am being too naive.
But what you have just said makes so much sense to me.
The windowblinds will in fact be a matter for the CGI; separating the Form from the Content.
I think I understand what you have said as being a kind of UAPI: Universal Application Programming Interface.
I did a quick google on the abbrieviation and it does not yet exist. Only API.
I hate inventing new terms when old ones serve just as well, if not better.
However it comes from my old hardware days when the second biggest chip on the board was the UART: Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter.
It was cleverly reduced by TI to a tiny 16 pin package, the rest done with a special 4KB bit memory and a few instructions.
It (the "UAPI") does pretty much the same thing which the Ethernet OSI 7 Layer Model tries to do. So far it The API looks and feels like software but is actually softWire, cleverly disguised.
I no NOT mean softwire as another name for software.
Idealy the "UAPI" reduces 7 layers of Meta-drivers to one Application.
The use of the word Ether (like softwire) in the Network also lends false credence to the meaning of the API.
The Ether was once thought to be Matterial which conducted light i.e. a kind of invisible wire. We now know it to be mere a Mode of the existence of Matter.
Not an Object in the real sense but a purely Mental one.
The concept may serve the interest of the Hardware (wire) Industry but not ours.
Our R&D team is working on this now.
Thanks for the the enlightening thought
Justin
---- Al Hartman <alhartman6(a)comcast.net> wrote:
> First of all, thanks to all of you for all your work on ReactOS.
>
> Secondly, why reinvent the wheel?
>
> Why not simply assure that ReactOS is compatible with WindowBlinds?
>
> http://www.stardock.com/products/windowblinds/
>
> I'm much more interested in ReactOS having Rock-Solid base functionality...
>
> - Printing
> - Networking
> - Speed
> - Compatibility with Apps.
>
> Rather than UI eye-candy.
>
> That stuff can come later, or by using the many third party skinning
> apps for Windows.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Al
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-general mailing list
> ros-general(a)reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
Hi I should love to see some new gudieles
how to get svn access. Today it seam anyone
that provide with a patch that is coder can
getting svn access. But I think we need
start think how we should handle it,
Here is some ideas how it can be
1. A maling list with patch or in Bugzila
I love see a maling list with the patch
2. When people have submit the patch
to us we start examing it see if it any godd
(we are doning that already)
3. To get SVN write access u need lest
provide patch in regual basic under
6 month lest, Then after 6 month the provider
can write to mailing list see if can getting
SVN write access before he grant SVN
write access, the full name and mailing
address must be provided, and we should
have a vote if that provder can getting
SVN write access. no accpect from all
this rules.
Yestday some was granted svn access
his name was not on the mailing list
why he got one, he did not write either
on the mailing list asking for svn access
that why I want see new guide lines how
svn write access handles. so every one
know how he is and why he was granted
to be granted after few patcher are not
accpect in my eys. For we are starting
getting alot with people with svn write
access. And new guide lines must be
create.
BestReagds
Magnus Olsen
Mikko Tikkanen wrote:
> Aye. I'm still in. Just have been a tad busy. I've been watching my
> mail but that's about it but since I started my school few weeks ago I
> have more time on my hands. At least when project deadlines aren't
> pushing too close.
Great.
> The school also has new advantages; since I'm studying UI/usability
> design I could do some actual user testing, with live subjects. I
> could also get artists involved as the schools also has art teaching.
Be careful not to make ReactOS into some kind of guinea pig for
eccentric design though. One of the most important goals for ReactOS,
interface-wise, is not requiring any retraining for people switching
from Windows.
Max Well wrote:
> As you said, there are already two UI designer, so I would like to
> redesign the setup.
I believe the setup is already being UI-ified. Contact Alex Ionescu for
details. See also:
http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/Alex_Ionescu/RosGooeySetup
Richard Campbell wrote:
> I don't think i quite understand this...Are you saying we should develop
> a new UI? I don't think so. The Windows UI is standard, and several
> million users KNOW this UI. Our UI should be kept as close as possible
> to windows without breaking any laws.
I honestly don't know where you got this idea from, but we will be
staying close to the Windows feel, as I explained above.
jwalsh(a)bigpond.net.au wrote:
> Richard is correct.
> I understand the statement below as a recipe for suicide.
> If you are having trouble getting skills on the ground now, this will
make sure you never do.
> Being SLAPP'ed by a multibillion business is no picnic.
What's this, chinese whispering? What exactly did I say we're going to
do which is going to make msft get interested in SLAPPing us? I'm
calling for help to improve our UI which currently is somewhere in the
pre-win95 age.
Martin Fuchs wrote:
> Yes, that's the best way: Write down what you intend to implement
> exactly on the Wiki or in Bugzilla. I will help in explorer, winefile
> and ibrowser as far as possible. But my available time is limited.
> Branching the code is possible, if you want to change explorer
> completely. But I would prefer to maintain only one code base. The
> already existing "lean-explorer" branch may be enough. ;-)
First off, PLEASE reply ONLY in ros-general. My initial mail states:
> Please reply to this mail only on the general list or to me in person
> (if you're not on the list and only get digests), it is only
> crossposted in ros-dev to get a wider range of attention.
Keeping track of conversation on multiple lists is only confusing. Thanks.
As for your suggestion, I'd like to say that I personally dislike
indirect communication like the wiki or bugzilla. Stuff gets done in a
fraction of the time if you can reach a quick concensus by means of word
exchange. I don't know why you seem to avoid IRC, but mailing list seems
alright with me as well. Seeing that you're as "in charge" of the look
of explorer as you currently are, maybe it would be beneficial if you
would join the UI Team yourself? Just a suggestion :).
Cheers,
mf.
First of all, thanks to all of you for all your work on ReactOS.
Secondly, why reinvent the wheel?
Why not simply assure that ReactOS is compatible with WindowBlinds?
http://www.stardock.com/products/windowblinds/
I'm much more interested in ReactOS having Rock-Solid base functionality...
- Printing
- Networking
- Speed
- Compatibility with Apps.
Rather than UI eye-candy.
That stuff can come later, or by using the many third party skinning
apps for Windows.
Thanks!
Al
You can find a new version on SF.NET
Initial network support and some more complex apps as firefox
respectively seamonkey seem to work.
Against to what I wrote, there's no additional app included in this RC.
I try to include some in the qemu variant for the next RC.
And for the intermediate time I question you to download the RC1 and try
it out, PLUS report bugs into our nice bugzilla!
I got how to make Japanese version of ReactOS.
I'll report results to ros-dev.
>
>
> Hello. I'm a Japanese translator.
>
> I have translated some rc-files in Japanese.
> Before sending rc-files, I want to confirm my translations.
> How can I do this?
>
> Following is all that I have done.
> 1) added jpn.nls to \lib\kernel32\nls\
> 2) modified \lib\kernel32\locale_rc.rc
> 3) added Mona Font (Japanese font) to \media\fonts\
> 4) added next line to \bootdata\hivesft.inf
> HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\SysFontSubstitutes","MS UI Gothic",0x00
00
> 0000,"mona"
>
Hi,
I looked at ReactOS some years ago, with a mind to using it with Smalltalk:
Digitalk V both for the pcXT and the pcAT.
Or Smalltalk Express.
I would appreciate any information at all.
Regards
Justin Walsh
Hello. I'm a Japanese translator.
I have translated some rc-files in Japanese.
Before sending rc-files, I want to confirm my translations.
How can I do this?
Following is all that I have done.
1) added jpn.nls to \lib\kernel32\nls\
2) modified \lib\kernel32\locale_rc.rc
3) added Mona Font (Japanese font) to \media\fonts\
4) added next line to \bootdata\hivesft.inf
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\SysFontSubstitutes","MS UI Gothic",0x0000
0000,"mona"
P.S.
explorer-ja.rc has an attribute of a binary file (svn:mime-type application/octet-stream),
so I can't make a patch file for it. Please someone remove this attribute.
Thank you.
tsk
