epssyis at gmail.com
Sun Sep 12 19:46:30 CDT 2010
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:29 AM, Dan Kegel <dank at kegel.com> wrote:
> James McKenzie wrote:
>> Dan Kegel <dank at kegel.com> wrote:
>>> And as long as it's up and running, how about a look forward
>>> at the 1.4 release plans?
>> Would be nice to know what has priority for this release.
>> I would love to see the DIB Engine be the 'deal maker'.
> Ain't gonna happen. Too hard, not enough manpower
> going into it.
> A more realistic goal held over from 1.2 might be
> DX10 support. There are several people chugging away,
> getting bits and pieces of that committed.
> I proposed a few smaller goals for 1.4 at
> http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleaseCriteria :
> Bug 6971, the mouse problem affecting many FPS-style games,
> IIRC Alexandre says it would take him four weeks to clean
> up the XInput2 patches
> AcceptEx (bug 280) - needed for Warcraft III and a number of other
> games (Mike Kaplinskiy's real close on this, so maybe it doesn't
> even bear mentioning as a 1.4 goal)
> Antialiasing/Multisampling (Roderick's got a patch that needs a few
> weeks of cleanup)
I like the looks of this list, from a gaming point of view. An
increasingly important missing feature is basic GFWL support (depends
.net 3.5sp1) which I hear is getting there slowly. Would be nice to
have by 1.4.
Out of interest why are applications not considered release goals? I'm
sure there is a very good reason I'd just like to know it. Just seems
to me that it would be a good idea to pick a handful of very popular,
but mostly ignored, applications and focus on having them work well by
release (CS5 is an example I can think of immediately).
Is there a time frame for 1.4? 1 year, 2 years, sooner?
More information about the wine-devel