Discussion: ReactOS Meeting Minutes

[gonzoMD]

no I don't think, as Z98 said, it was a closed Meeting.

[vicmarcal]

Hi!
The meeting was closed to the public but it doesn't mean we can't share the minutes with the Community . Iirc we agreed to publish the minutes.
The "No" of Z98 is just about pasting the full log of the meeting But he is the one that can clarify it.

[Aeneas]

The approach here is nearly as "open" as that of CentOS...

[vicmarcal]

The approach here is nearly as "open" as that of CentOS...

hmm? (?)

[PurpleGurl]

no I don't think, as Z98 said, it was a closed Meeting.

That is why I said "redacted," meaning with the sensitive parts omitted. There were some things that were high level business that didn't belong in public, but things related to the OS itself would be of public interest and not compromise anything if shared. So minutes might be okay, but a full transcript would not be.

I would be curious to know the more technical details/ramifications. I understand ARWINSS is official. I imagine that means there would be an immediate change in compatibility (hopefully a considerable more as I understand since it uses more of the time-proven WINE code). I don't know what the future ramifications would be, like if some things could be worked around the compatibility layer for more performance as developers are comfortable with replacing some of its code. In time, developers might have a better solution, but if ARWINSS is the best for now and makes us get a daily use OS faster, then I believe the right decision was made. That will allow them to devote more time to other aspects, like the USB rewrite, finishing up the themes support, finishing off the sound, etc. Oh, and general bug fixes.

I think I am drifting OT, so I will close. I am just eager to learn of the things they are willing/able to share and how that will impact things as a whole.

[vicmarcal]

I would be curious to know the more technical details/ramifications. I understand ARWINSS is official. I imagine that means there would be an immediate change in compatibility (hopefully a considerable more as I understand since it uses more of the time-proven WINE code). I don't know what the future ramifications would be, like if some things could be worked around the compatibility layer for more performance as developers are comfortable with replacing some of its code. In time, developers might have a better solution, but if ARWINSS is the best for now and makes us get a daily use OS faster, then I believe the right decision was made. That will allow them to devote more time to other aspects, like the USB rewrite, finishing up the themes support, finishing off the sound, etc. Oh, and general bug fixes.

I think I am drifting OT, so I will close. I am just eager to learn of the things they are willing/able to share and how that will impact things as a whole.

Hi PurpleGirl,
There are some Forum threads that explains Arwinss and Win32(RoS) differences is terms of compatibility and performance.
If you want a deep review, you can give a look to:
http://reactosnews.blogspot.com/2010/07 ... ros-i.html
http://reactosnews.blogspot.com/2010/07 ... os-ii.html
http://reactosnews.blogspot.com/2010/07 ... os-ii.html
Use the button in the left to translate it to English. I have offtopiced a lot.

[PurpleGurl]

Hi PurpleGirl,
There are some Forum threads that explains Arwinss and Win32(RoS) differences is terms of compatibility and performance.
If you want a deep review, you can give a look to:
http://reactosnews.blogspot.com/2010/07 ... ros-i.html
http://reactosnews.blogspot.com/2010/07 ... os-ii.html
http://reactosnews.blogspot.com/2010/07 ... os-ii.html
Use the button in the left to translate it to English. I have offtopiced a lot.

Not quite what I asked. I meant in context of the recent decisions - only new information. The context of what I said somehow got lost. Where, I said "I would be curious to know the more technical details/ramifications," that refers to the technical details and ramifications of the MEETINGS, not anything from the past nor about how ARWINSS works. That first line of the paragraph you quoted was still talking about the meeting.

I am mainly interested in the large picture as a whole and only the technical specifics as pertaining to the meeting. The rest was basically me posting what I already know - showing off my knowledge, not requesting any about ARWINSS itself per se. Then I said that I wondered what the overall future implications would be - in terms of Reactos and ALL as a whole in connection with the recent meeting, not how ARWINSS works. In the future, meaning nothing ever covered nor discussed yet, I wonder if we can work around ARWINSS and do things more directly in sections where coders are confident they can improve performance without damaging compatibility. In other words, take some select sections back to known good code. Surely everything doesn't have to go through the compatibility wrapper if you know what you are doing and don't break the rest. So I mean like 2+ years down the road, not what it can do now. And when I closed, I was still talking about the meeting.

I apologize in advance if I am straining rule #1 (civility) any, or the topic rules. I was just curious about the meeting itself and the decisions and ramifications of it that could be discussed, that was all.

[cmoibenlepro]

no I don't think, as Z98 said, it was a closed Meeting.

That is why I said "redacted," meaning with the sensitive parts omitted. There were some things that were high level business that didn't belong in public, but things related to the OS itself would be of public interest and not compromise anything if shared. So minutes might be okay, but a full transcript would not be.

That's a good idea. Just delete the sensitive parts from the transcript.

[Z98]

Correction: Apparently I was nominated by Aleksey to do the minutes without realizing he wasn't joking. Since this was a closed door meeting, only the final decisions will be published and no summary of the discussions will be provided, once I get around to drafting it.

Outdated: As far as I can tell no one was ever assigned to draft up minutes for this month's meeting. So beyond the logs kept by the participants that actually bothered logging, there are no summaries in the works.

[Murmur]

Then can you at least just say a few points on things that you are able to talk about in a non-official capacity?

[Z98]

I have no idea what you are asking here.

[vicmarcal]

Then can you at least just say a few points on things that you are able to talk about in a non-official capacity?

Z98: I think he means if you can reveal some non-sensitive information now..
Murmur: If I understood Z98, he is going to reveal the non-sensitive information,as the final non-sensitive decissions, taken during the meeting. Just wait a little.Dont be anxious!!! ^^
PS: I am anxious too..I wasn't able to be connected during the whole meeting, so it'll be a "semi-surprise" for me too.

[EmuandCo]

Asking again and again won't help you at all. wait patiently till all devs think it's fine to release the internal information. They will be released, if the community wants so, but when the members of the devs team decide to do.

[Aeneas]

You dev people are certainly free to do as you like - you also can make a kite party or go scuba-diving.

Thing is that "the devs" is an interesting entity shaped by custom law; just like your whole project: for some reason, some people, whose work is surely a conditio sine qua non for the accomplishment of the project as it is, decide "to do" something, under undisclosed considerations, "because they always did so", and without regard to what your potential users were thinking. If you decide to "forever omit USB" or "withdraw entirely from SATA", noone could say anything about it; people may be as disappointed as they like, they could do just nothing about the fact.

I find this state sub-optimal, as "the secret meeting" is rather "unconstitutional" - due to the lack of HAVING any constitution; it is not clear WHO does WHAT and WHO decides WITH WHOM such meetings are to be held, and decides on WHAT goals following WHICH discussion. - I mean, what would you say if, mirroring this, all other non-dev people interested in this project were to hold their own "secret meeting" and decide on the direction of the project? (IN THEORY, they could; nay, further: if this is an open source project, people actually could TAKE ALL YOUR CODE and HIRE devs and continue to do things WITHOUT the initial devs, due to the permanent state of disarray. - Just luckily noone is enthusiastically greedy enough.)

If this meeting was done at least with the purpose to establish mechanisms of organisation and direction crucial to the future forthcoming, I am all for it; but if this is "the style of ReactOS", it is not exactly a foundation of transparency (and thus, growth). To compare it - it is all a bit going on like in a viking village, but never quite advancing to becoming the Roman Empire.

But as I said, you may go watch a horse-race "in secret", too, if you like. Noone is stopping you, and if "you" think it helps...

[EmuandCo]

If this meeting was done at least with the purpose to establish mechanisms of organisation and direction crucial to the future forthcoming, I am all for it; but if this is "the style of ReactOS", it is not exactly a foundation of transparency (and thus, growth). To compare it - it is all a bit going on like in a viking village, but never quite advancing to becoming the Roman Empire.

But as I said, you may go watch a horse-race "in secret", too, if you like. Noone is stopping you, and if "you" think it helps...

Now guess why this part of the meeting was closed? ^^