[ros-dev] very confused

[Brandon Turner]

theUser BL wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I am now very confused.
>
> It seems for me, that the current informations about ReactOS´s 
> situation is poor. And if there existing informations, they are IMHO 
> contradictorily.
>
> On 27.1.2006 Steven Edwards wrote "Reset, Reboot, Restart, legal 
> issues and the long road to 0.3"
> http://www.reactos.org/xhtml/de/news_page_14.html
>
> In this text there is no word about leaked Windows-code. So it seems, 
> that the main problem is revers engineering, which is not clean room 
> rev. eng.
>
> One day later a developer says in the forum
> http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=13239&highlight=#13239
> "The biggest problem isn't disassembled code. The fact is that 4 of 
> the developers have had a copy of the leaked Windows source."
>
> So, the biggest problem is, that some ROS-developer have looked in 
> leaked code.

I think this was when GvG thought that Alex had seen some of the stolen 
NT Kernel Code.  However, Alex did not see it, and this has been 
clairfied with all parties,  so really leaked code isnt a problem.

>
> He have said that, and nobody have contradicted it.
>
> But at
> http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/007832.html
> a developer says to me
> "The leaked source code was never an issue here, that was an 
> escalation of
> the mail which was posted on the public list. The rumours which 
> materialized
> from that were unfounded and untrue."
> and the cvs tree will be completly re-opend.
>
> In an other mail, I don't find it at the moment, anybody says, that 
> there is still no Microsoft-Code found in ROS. All is clean.
>
> On the following
> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2006-February/007717.html
> a developer says
> "I am told that the sources for FreeLdr are all okay, except for the
> some of the bootsectors having been pretty much just disassembled from
> MS's. Is this true?"
> The answer comes from an other developer
> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2006-February/007722.html
> "crashfourit has posted a patch here:"
>
> That means, that it is possible, that MS-bootsector-code have found 
> the way in ROS, if I understood it right.
>
> And at
> http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-general/2006-February/002128.html 
>
> somebody cite something where a Codewaever chef says, that in ROS is 
> stolen code.
>
>
> I have at the current no links, but I have the feeling, that there 
> existing a lot of more comments like these, which me all confused very 
> much.
>
>
>
> And then ReactOS gives for me more questions then answers.
>
> What does the Audit-process mean?
> You have - as somebody says - already seen, that no Windows-Code is in 
> ReactOS.
> But you want with the audit look for code, which are integrated by 
> (not clean room) reverse engineering.
> But how do you want to find it?
>
> The clean room inverse enginering is like re-writing an existing book, 
> without reading the existing book itself. Only reading review, 
> critiques and summaries about the book are alowed to read.
> But there existing some people who have reverse enginered, but not 
> clean room. This is like someone, who have completly read the book 
> itself and tries to write the book what he read then down in mind.
> But how do you want to become out, who have read the original book and 
> who not?
>
> Steve Edwars have written "and the long road to 0.3". Is it still 
> true, that it needs now longer, until 0.3 comes out? The tree will 
> already be opend. Does it mean, that 0.3 comes only after the end of 
> the audit-progess out? If this is true, comes then before the end of 
> the audit other releases out (0.2.10, 0.2.11, .... etc) ?
>
> You see. I am very confused.
>
> I don't expect that you answer to my mail here.
> I only want, that your public clarification,
> http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/007832.html
> Murphy have written "The whole tree will be reopened in the state it 
> was in before it closed.
> More details will follow when this happens.", will really clarify all. 
> So that no longer confuseness for anyone exists.
>
>
> Greatings
> theuserbl
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>
As for the rest, I dont know a lot of the answers but I dont think there 
is any solid answer.  We are still shifting through maybe ideas and 
going back on things we orginally planned.  Hopfully we come up with a 
plan and stick with it soon.

Brandon