At 09:52 PM 5/31/2004 -0400, you wrote:
We are writing a Microsoft Windows compatible operating system...this means we must do things the way windows does them...
The second statement does not follow from the first. Otherwise why even bother building another OS. If we come up with a better way to maintain network client state that is compatible with existing applications then more power to us. To take the attitude you have taken above is not helpful.
however you are more than welcome to change the way a particular thing works, and either submit it to the list for review or make it one of your own side projects/addons. Sorry if this sounds rather zealotish, but that's the way it has to be.
In my opinion, it is too unyielding a stance, and I'm not convinced it is the way it has to be.
Besides, we aren't even remotely close to that level of networking yet and probably won't be for months, if not years, to come.
I think once someone takes up an interest it is more like weeks to months away. It's still interesting to discuss don't you think?
Richard
ros@xzite.fsnet.co.uk wrote:
sysadmins. does anyone else have any opinions on this?
I think keeping client information on the server is a better idea also. Perhaps the appropriate directories (like the user settings directory) can be mounted at a given directory a la unix. The mount functionality might be doable with a filter driver. Or perhaps some appropriate registry settings could be changed to support client data remotely.
les
ros-general mailing list ros-general@reactos.com http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
ros-general mailing list ros-general@reactos.com http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
Rex Jolliff rex@osexperts.com ReactOS (www.reactos.com) -- Check it out