Revert done.
Unless you had local changes in NTVDM, your local changes in win32k should be OK, if you haven’t updated your local trunks to some revision in between 66575 and the revert!
Here I have 4 different local WCs with local patches in different parts of win32k/winsrv (modules that were moved), and after the revert (and later update of the local WCs) the local changes remained.
H.
De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-bounces at reactos.org] De la part de Sylvain Petreolle
Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:58
À : ReactOS Development List
Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
Backup ALL your local changes.
Svn doesn't do existed-deleted-but-is-back changes :
as the history goes, it deletes, adds and changes files. With local changes, you get tree conflicts : modified but deleted.
Again, back up with svn diff and/or plain copy the working copy before any update.
Kind regards,
Sylvain Petreolle
_____
De : Pierre Schweitzer <pierre at reactos.org>
À : ReactOS Development List <ros-dev at reactos.org>
Envoyé le : Vendredi 6 mars 2015 13h46
Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
On 03/06/2015 01:30 PM, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote:
> First I would prefer to revert everything I done so far for that (failed) attempt of tree restructure, because otherwise nobody will be happy. As far as I can see in a local SVN repo I did here, if I revert to the tree shape pre-66575 nothing should break (I mean, if you update your local copy that was at, let’s say, revision 66574 and you update to revision after-my-would-be-revert, it should be ok, your local changes should survive.
Given these last information, I'm all for a revert.
>>>> Then it would be nice to have a discussion with everybody and seriously to how move the main parts of the things.
>>>> Cheers,
>> Hermès.
>>>> De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-bounces at reactos.org] De la part de daniel.reimer
> Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 13:12
> À : ReactOS Development List
> Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
>>>> Hii,
>>>> Well... In theory the restructuring might be logical and maybe even a good idea to separate some of the DLL/win32 folder etc, but this can't be done as one man show. It breaks the patches in jira, breaks the stuff our devs might have locally and maybe someone has something to say to your plans.
>> How to resolve this? Tbh, no clue. But a open discussion BEFORE commiting would be a start IMO. So guys, what now? Can we keep it or not?
>>>> Greetings
>>>> Daniel
>>>>>>>> Von meinem Samsung Gerät gesendet.
>>>> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
> Von: Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO <hermes.belusca at sfr.fr>
> Datum: 06.03.2015 12:03 (GMT+01:00)
> An: 'ReactOS Development List' <ros-dev at reactos.org>
> Betreff: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
>> So...
>> ... must I revert trunk pre-66575 ?
>> Hermès.
>> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-bounces at reactos.org] De la part de Aleksey
> Bragin
> Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 10:48
> À : ReactOS Development List
> Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 66575: Start source tree
> (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
>> On 06.03.2015 2:58, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote:
>> Hi,
>>>> So first, please receive my apologies for not having warned in ros-dev
>> about this (continuation of) tree restructure I did starting with
>> r66575. Indeed this was the first thing to do before doing anything,
>> even if I talked about that on IRC and JIRA!
> Wrong.
> You did not need to warn, you need to get majority of devs to support this
> change, to get comments from them, to make sure they continue to feel "at
> home" in ReactOS source code.
>> Right now, for the sake of subjective beautification you just forced
> everyone but you to adapt their patches (myself included, I have many
> working copies) just because you feel the tree structure was wrong.
>> This is just ridiculous. As Pierre said, we are a team here. And teamwork
> without big issues is what is making our project a good place to work in, to
> get pleasure and satisfaction from the work done.
>>>> In fact, the tree restructure discussion started 5 years ago, along
>> with the cmake bringup: see the big thread here:
>> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html <http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2010-July/013257.html> .
> Imagine what, I was part of it.
>>> At that
>> time the main argument was that we were also in the middle of changing
>> the old build system (rbuild) to a new one (cmake) so it was
>> problematic to do those two big changes at once. Also at that time,
>> seeing the argumentation of Ged, Timo, Jérôme and the few others
>> (active developers) who dared to participate to this discussion, it
>> was clear that a tree restructure was necessary anyway, sooner or later.
> This is called
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-purchase_rationalization <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-purchase_rationalization> . After you made
> the change you start explaining that everyone was supporting it, it was so
> much needed, and let's just forget about any side-effects it may have
> caused.
>>> In 2012 some tree restructure happened (r56305) by moving around and
>> in a more logical manner some core components of win32.
> Yep.
>>> What happens now in 2015, i.e. 5 years after ? We have CMake well
>> established, everything works, but only win32 core was reorganized.
> Sure, 5 years is a magic number which means you can safely ignore everyone
> else and just force your own change.
>>> I made http://jira.reactos.org/browse/CORE-9111 <http://jira.reactos.org/browse/CORE-9111> , people started to
>> give proposals. You came back with the almost same argument, that is
>> to finish the existing things first (adapt that: at the time of CMake,
>> it was CMake, now, it's fix all ReactOS 0.4 bugs), and then improve
>> structure of source tree. Since not all the existing bugs will be
>> fixed by then, we can continue this way and wait another 5 years in order
> to have a real tree restructure?
>> I don't think so.
>> So I took that for granted and committed r66575.
> You know, users don't care about source code tree structure. Tree is for
> developers. Users (and hence, popularity and usability of ReactOS) like when
> ReactOS does not crash, when ReactOS runs their apps, when ReactOS loads
> native binary drivers.
> And my point is that internal changes (code refactorings, tree restructures,
> reformatting) must happen only when the advantage of that is more than the
> disadvantage/side effects.
> Are you going to say that ReactOS 0.4 is closer now because you restructured
> the tree according to your taste? Was there any urge to do the restructure?
>>> Active developers really think (at least, myself) it's a pain in the
>> ***
> The key part: "myself". Let's face it: you silently ignored my opinion and
> decided not to ask anyone else. This is PITA, not the tree structure.
>>> that when we code on some given module (example: shell), we need to
>> modify some bit of code in base/shell/whatever, some bit of code in
>> dll/win32/shell32, some bit of code here and there. All the code of
>> the shell should be tied together. This goes also for everything else:
>> the core of NT (kernel, ntdll, "base" drivers...), the win32 subsystem
>> (win32k; for it the change in r56305 started to make things more
>> logical: you would not have to modify code in some win32k/ directory
>> while also changing
>> dll/win32/gdi32 or dll/win32/user32 that were by the way amongst all
>> the rest of wine dlls, etc...) .
> It's not "more logical", it's just different logical approaches.
>>> Because I didn't want to wait yet another 5 years I decided to start
>> something.
> Just remember, trunk is not your private branch. You have to take other devs
> opinion into account. And you are not always right. Sometimes even Alex
> Ionescu fails, though I must say it happens very rare.
> Get used to convince people. Remember Arwinss? Did I just delete the
> existing trunk win32ss back then? Imagine if I did? My reasoning was
> perfect, the subsystem was superior to trunk back then in many ways, and "I
> did not want to wait another 10 years for someone to finish trunk's
> win32ss".
>>> OK my fault I would have to get a synthesis of the different proposals
>> of tree restructures I got, then put in ros-dev, then wait 1 month
>> until everybody starts to vote. Of course you would get people
>> thinking it's better to do à la Wine and sort the files by extension
>> type (that's what we almost have currently) and it was already
>> repeated that it is BAD because it doesn't translate the fact that
>> ROS/windows is built by modules; others would have thought it's nice
>> to have this piece of thing next to another one whereas this can be
>> postponed later on until the *obvious* parts of code have been properly
> packed together.
> Yes, unless I don't know something and suddenly all your ideas are
> absolutely true without the need for verification. Mine aren't, I always
> consult with other skilled people.
>>> And because of that, here is my proposal: UNTIL details get fixed, I
>> propose
>> to:
>> - keep the /boot/, /include/, /lib/, /media/ and /tools/ directories
>> (as well as /cmake/ and the files in / ) untouched.
>> - ntoskrnl, ntdll and the drivers we have in /drivers/ (SAUF, the
>> multimedia
>> ones) go into some main "ntcore" directory (ntcore, ntos, call it
>> whatever you prefer. I'm inclined to the second name, but I'm ok with the
> first one).
>> - the keyboard layouts can be moved either to win32ss/ or to / (in
>> case we can give sense to keyboard layouts in "pure" NT, for example
>> when we run usetup, etc...)
>> - ok... my already-done (but revertable) modifs from 66575 (directory
>> renamings can be done, it's not set in stone).
>> - putting all printing support in some /win32/printsup (or
>> "printing"...) directory : that means: localspl, ntprint, printui,
>> spoolsv and spoolss, and winspool (so far...)
> Oh, now you shared your secret plan with us. Thank you so much!
> Actually, I would like to invent something better than just copying the NT
> source code tree layout.
>>> That's what I'm 99.99% sure (and what I think is quite clear).
>> Concerning the rest (that can create discussion) I still keep it in old
> directories.
> ...
>> Regards,
>> Hermès.
>>>>>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-bounces at reactos.org] De la part de
>> Aleksey Bragin Envoyé : vendredi 6 mars 2015 00:15 À :
>> ros-dev at reactos.org Objet : Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca]
>> 66575: Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X
>> Win32, Shell, Services, MVDM
>>>> Hermes,
>>>> What the fuck, may I ask?
>>>> I don't understand since when we started doing big changes in trunk
>> without talking (or listening) to anyone at all, just at your own
> discretion?
>>>> Are you so sure the change is accepted by majority of our developers?
>> Did you get approval of those devs? Give them some respect which they
>> earned over years with their skills and commitment.
>>>> I understand ReactOS is a very loosely managed project (to favor ease
>> of development), but totally ignoring everyone?
>> I checked CORE-9111 and I don't see any single comment from Timo,
>> Jerome, James, whoever else counts.
>>>> Regards,
>> Aleksey Bragin
>> P.S. I'm not talking about actual changes, I'm talking about the
>> process and attitude.
>>>> On 06.03.2015 2:03, hbelusca at svn.reactos.org wrote:
>>> Author: hbelusca
>>> Date: Thu Mar 5 23:03:33 2015
>>> New Revision: 66575
>>>>>> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575 <http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575> <http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575 <http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=66575&view=rev> &view=rev> &view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Start source tree (final, I hope!) restructuration. Part 1/X Win32,
>>> Shell, Services, MVDM
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>>>>> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
--
Pierre Schweitzer <pierre at reactos.org>
System & Network Administrator
Senior Kernel Developer
ReactOS Deutschland e.V.
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev at reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/attachments/20150306/e6668e43/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Ros-dev
mailing list
CHAPTER VII. THE FOUR CLASSES OF SOCIETY. THE FOUR CLASSES OF SOCIETY. "After the herald had given the names of the wrestlers who were to make the first round, the fellows came in. They were dressed without any clothes to speak of, or rather they were quite undressed, with the exception of a cloth around their loins. They came in on opposite sides of the ring, and stood there about five feet apart, each man resting his hands on his knees, and glaring at the other like a wild beast. They[Pg 231] looked more like a pair of tigers than human beings, and for a moment I thought it was not at all unlike what a bull-fight in Spain might be. I turned upon her choking with anger, but her melting beauty rendered me helpless. Black woods were on our left. "Shall we turn in here?" I asked. "None of that with me," he growled. "Do you know who I am, Countess Lalage? I am Leon Lagage, Count of the Holy Roman Empire, and your husband. Incomparable woman, you cannot alter that fact. For better or worse, for richer or poorer, till death do us part!" I have in this way imperfectly indicated a methodical plan of generating a design, as far as words alone will serve, beginning with certain premises based upon a particular work to be performed, and then proceeding to consider in consecutive order the general character of the machine, mode of operation, movements and adjustments, general arrangement, strains, special arrangement, and proportions. ‘Alas! what is life, what is death, what are we, 11th January two best dresses. Commencement was as usual, with a few showers “All right,” agreed Sandy. “Dick, you and I are the ground crew. As soon as you’re ready, Mr. Whiteside, we’ll take hold!” Effects of Walpole's Administration—Formation of the new Ministry—Attitude of the Malcontents—Committee of Inquiry into Walpole's Administration—Walpole's Protectors—Ministerial Measures—Prorogation of Parliament—Disasters of the French—British Division in the Netherlands—Opening of Parliament—The German Mercenaries—Amendment of the Gin Act—George goes to Germany—Stair and De Noailles in Franconia—Stair in a Trap—Bold Resolution of King George—The Battle of Dettingen—Resignation of Stair—Retreat of the French—Negotiations for Peace—Treaty of Worms—Pelham becomes Prime Minister—The Attacks of Pitt on Carteret—Attempted Invasion of England—Its Failure—Progress of the French Arms—Frederick II. invades Bohemia—His Retirement—Resignation of Carteret—Pelham strengthens his Ministry—Death of the Emperor—Campaign in Flanders—Battle of Fontenoy—Campaign of Frederick II.—The Young Pretender's Preparations—Loss of the Elizabeth—Landing in the Hebrides—The Highland Clans join him—The First Brush—Raising of the Standard—Cope's Mistake—He turns aside at Dalwhinnie—Charles makes a Dash for Edinburgh—The March to Stirling—Right of the Dragoons—The "Canter of Coltbridge"—Edinburgh surprised by the Highlanders—Charles marching against Cope—Battle of Prestonpans—Delay in marching South—Discontent of the Highland Chiefs—The Start—Preparations in England—Apathy of the Aristocracy—Arrival of the Duke of Cumberland—Charles crosses the Border—Capture of Carlisle—The March to Derby—Resolution to retreat—"Black Friday"—The Retreat—Recapture of Carlisle—Siege of Stirling—Battle of Falkirk—Retreat to the Highlands—Cumberland's Pursuit—Gradual Collapse of the Highlanders—Battle of Culloden—Termination of the Rebellion—Cruelty of the Duke of Cumberland—Adventures of the Young Pretender—Trials and Executions—Ministerial Crisis. The next morning he was up betimes, and cooked the boys as good a breakfast as he could out of the remainder of his store and what he could get from the hospital, and then gave what was left to whoever came. The comfortable crib, which had cost the Deacon so much labor, had been pre-empted by the Surgeon for some of his weakest patients. "You two step forward one pace," he commanded. "Gentleman, I've got my six. The rest are yours." "Where are you goin'?" he said sternly. Every now and then the crowd would break into the latest rhymings of MacKinnon's poet: A large thicket, at this moment, gave the dusty foot an opportunity of doubling, and, for an instant, diverging from the straightforward course, though it availed him little, he seemed to feel the breath of his pursuer on the back of his neck; his foot sounded as if at his heels; he drew his garment closely around him, turned suddenly to the right, and, bounding from the ground, the next instant a splash was heard in the little river, and the fugitive was safe from his pursuer. HoME明日之后怎么免费刷一级纳米材料
ENTER NUMBET 0018scxjsp.com.cn www.b002.com.cn www.xkei.com.cn www.cowa.org.cn tfne.com.cn sylton.com.cn www.xjmw.com.cn gx10000.com.cn xcbyxd.com.cn vccloud.com.cn