i have itunes 7.60 successfully running on f10 kde 4.2

[Warren Dumortier]

2009/4/11 Ben Klein <shacklein at gmail.com>:
> 2009/4/11 Warren Dumortier <nwarrenfl at gmail.com>:
>> 2009/4/10 Ben Klein <shacklein at gmail.com>:
>>> 2009/4/9 EA Durbin <ead1234 at hotmail.com>:
>>>> After all we don't want to vastly increase our potential customer base and
>>>> potentially get several $70 per crossover professional license or $40 per
>>>> standard license fees, but rather wait until someone writes a hefty check to
>>>> port it up front.
>>>
>>> You're confusing Wine with Crossover. Wine does not have license fees.
>>> Wine does not ask for money if you want to use it, nor do Wine devs
>>> ask for money if you want things fixed. Wine devs typically ask for
>>> patches if you want things fixed.
>
> You say I'm "all wrong". Am I wrong about Wine not having license
> fees, and not asking for money when devs start getting involved to fix
> things? If so, I owe a lot of money to WineHQ!
>
>>> Wine also does not say "we need to get this app fixed because people
>>> demand it". The closest Wine comes to that is "we need to get these
>>> API calls because a bunch of apps use them and they're all breaking".
>>
>> You're all wrong, it's maybe not a matter of money or to have more
>> users, but to let it work for a lot of users for our current users
>> base. It's very annoying, and a lot of Wine users might need it ATM. A
>> lot of people have older iPods who are supported by some programs like
>> Amarok or Rhythmbox, but not for the latest generations...
>>
>
> Sorry, when exactly were you appointed to decide Wine patch acceptance
> and implementation policy? It might be annoying, many users might
> *strongly desire* it ("need" is the wrong word) but unless there's
> someone actively submitting patches to fix it, it won't get fixed.
> iTunes is not an "important" application in any way, and the bugs
> involved are not blockers, nor do they even affect a wide range of
> applications.
>
> You also seem to contradict your own argument:
>> and a lot of Wine users might need it ATM.
> talking about support for latest generation of iPods, followed by:
>> A lot of people have older iPods who are supported by some programs
>> like Amarok or Rhythmbox, but not for the latest generations...
>
> My guess is that there are more people who have older generation iPods
> than those who have newer. I could be wrong, but until statistics are
> presented, the problem you're talking about is nowhere near as urgent
> as you imply.
>
> Regardless, things don't magically get fixed because a user (no matter
> how many users) say "I want this fixed". Bug reports are more useful
> than requests like this, with extra detail provided on request. I've
> had some bugs resolved very quickly by providing a lot of relevant
> information, but there are still plenty of open bugs that have had no
> progress in a long time (some of mine included) because there is no
> one attempting to patch it. Sometimes this is a matter of effort
> required (like some of the nastier ddraw bugs), sometimes there's no
> one available who is experienced enough to write correct patches,
> sometimes the problem is too trivial for the experienced devs to spend
> their time on, since they have bigger things to worry about.
>

What i said was to fix the installer issue for the moment, that would
be something great and maybe not too difficult?
Maybe i could have a look, but i will not be able to make a patch, but
i'll have a look, who knows. :D

But IMO it would be good to have iTunes working, i was not saying "i
would like to see everything work in iTunes".