[ros-dev] Getting a Windows Server 2003 license for the project?
pierre.schweitzer at reactos.org
Tue Jan 18 20:43:04 UTC 2011
> For my information??
> You need to start your sentences a little more politely
Wasn't aware it was that impolite (cf: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/for-your-information-FYI.html).
So, s/For your information/If I may bring that point to you Sir.
> You're talking about testing mappings via the FsRtl kernel API's,
> which isn't important to an end user nor 99% of devs who work on
> It's a feature you choose to implement with regard to how the control
> blocks are handled.
Well... I let you explain to the users that ReactOS will stay at its current state as important features have been implemented.
Furthermore, I heard some would like to have ReactOS handle NTFS. Without MCBs, it will be hard. Unless we write our own hackish driver, ofc.
> Why is that an "old" point? We've only recently started discussing it.
Old point was refering to "a point that has been discussed in a previous mail and not the one I was answering to.
> You mean it's useful for you.
Ok. Let's reimplement Windows 2003 without Windows 2003. And next time someone will say "Oh! ReactOS is bad, they are stealing code from Microsoft, they are reverse engineering code", we won't be able to answer: "You forget we have a Windows 2003 to perform test".
Some test-based development ~.
And I already often ask Sylvain for tests on Windows 2003 so...
> Secondly, anyone who states that we implement a 2k3 kernel is wrong.
> Alex used to target 2k3 in the days of his kernel rewrites
> but the fact is that most of our kernel is very much NT5.1 based (due
> to the similarities) and in many cases totally different than any
> of the NT kernels.
As I wrote in my previous mail, we target Windows 2003. But for some obvious reasons (need for quickly implemented & working code, for example) not all the parts are Windows NT(5.2) designed. This may explain current driven rewrites...
> I'm not sure why you felt the need to be rude/aggressive, perhaps you
> feel threatened in by my question which now appears to be
> "Would anyone other than Pierre have any use for a (free) remotely
> available copy of 2k3?"
Purpose wasn't to be rude or whatever. Just keep in mind we aren't all English native-speakers and we may not have the same understanding of that language than yours.
> If you really need it, you can probably make a good case to the
> foundation for your own copy.
> My point is, is it really worth having this online server just for
> your use when it would be better served as an MSVC build slave which
> would benefit everyone.
Ok, then. Let's forget about that idea.
More information about the Ros-dev