Directx9

[Joerg Mayer]

On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 09:57:52AM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
> I'm reminded of the saying, "if not now then when? if not you then who?"

I think that once the API and the internal infrastructure are stable, the
preconditions for that change are in place.

> >Once Wine is declared to be ready for "ordinary users", the development
> >process should indeed change. 
> 
> And when exactly is that?
> 
> "Ready" is a mostly meaningless, arbitrary target. Many users are using 
> Wine today despite its official alpha-ness.

When exactly: When Alexandre changes that line in the ANNOUNCE, so just
guess who has the last word in this discussion :-)

> >A good example on how to continue is KDE:
> 
> KDE bears no resemblence to Wine, they have always done releases with 
> release management.

I proposed to adapt the KDE release management to wine, once there is
a "stable" branch. There are a lot of nice mechanisms that are worth
evaluating.

> There's no such thing for Wine. There is only increasing accuracy in the 
>   emulation. The TODO lists that have been drawn up for 0.9 and 1.0 are 
> themselves pretty arbitrary: 0.9 has a theme of tidying up the 
> interfaces but still stuff like execshield support was in there, WM 
> rewrite and so on.

Right, there *is* no such thing, but as written above, there *should be*,
once Wine is officially declared ready for the general public

> I don't think it makes any sense to put it off indefinately on the 
> grounds that Wine is still a developers-only release. That's circular logic.

You are right on this point - there are some things to do:
1) decide when this sort of change/release will be done
2) how it will be done (Head/stable branch or some other model)
3) up to that point: don't slow down development by treating the
   wine tree like it was a stable branch.

    ciao
      Joerg

-- 
Joerg Mayer                                           <jmayer at loplof.de>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.