[ros-dev] Restructuring ReactOS

[Maya Posch]

I made some more general project structure suggestions a while ago, so 
it's not so strange that I find myself agreeing with these suggestions. 
While I feel that some of them, like the Windows version-specific 
branches, could use a bit more discussion, I do agree on the note of 
focusing on getting more feature-parity with one specific version of 
Windows. My vote would be on 2k3 (NT 5.2) as it's the most mature 
version of the NT 5.x series in many respects. What runs on XP will 
(generally) run on 2k3 as well.

Having the Vista/Win7 APIs in another branch or whatever is an option, 
but we should discuss the feasibility and practicality of this first, in 
my opinion.

As for hacks and tests, I'm in full agreement. A hack means that someone 
  can't or doesn't know how to do something elegantly/the right way, 
whether it's due to ignorance or lack of interest. Unit tests are an 
absolute requirement to get working code and should not be skimped on in 
any way.


Maya


Richard Campbell wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> 
> One of the big issues I'm seeing with regards to ReactOS is the lack
> of overall structure.  Currently ReactOS is loosely compatible with
> NT, 2000, XP, and even Vista.  However, I believe that in order to
> achieve true stability and compatibility some changes should be
> implemented.  I'm offering my opinion as a suggestion of how to
> structure things.  While I believe that everyone should be allowed to
> have fun developing a great project, I believe that we can still do
> this, while maintaining a little more structure.  Please feel free to
> comment on this email.
> 
> First Issue:  Moving Target
> 
> Every since I first started watching ReactOS in 2001, I've noticed
> that ROS is suffering from moving target syndrome.  Microsoft
> continually releases new versions of Windows each year, and ROS
> struggles to keep up.  driver compatibility, app compatibility, etc.
> are all affected by this.  Development is all over the place.  If
> someone knows how to implement a vista API call, they do it.  XP?
> Same, etc.  The problem is this can cause compatibility issues with
> drivers and apps that do DLL hooking, as well as other oddball
> scenarios.  In order to have truely 100% compatibility, we need to
> find a way to deal with this type of development.
> 
> I propose picking a single target, Either Windows XP or Windows 2003,
> to serve as the trunk  (I currently recommend Windows XP since it is
> compatible with nearly everything out there.)  All core development
> will be based around this.  Our releases will be based around this.
> 
> Branches will be created for Windows 7, Windows Server 2008, and
> Windows Vista specific code.  Any platform specific code will go into
> this branch.  Any code that is no longer valid will be removed from
> this branch.  This allows multiple versions of Windows to be targetted
> at the same time.
> 
> The trunk will continue on it's path until a)  It is 90-100%
> compatible with most apps/drivers or b)  XP/2003 become so old and out
> of date they aren't used by anyone anymore, similar to the way
> 98/NT4/2000 are now.  If either of those scenarios happen, we vote to
> switch to a different branch.  We should avoid switching to the most
> cutting edge version of windows, however, and instead focus on the
> most widely used version at the time.
> 
> Second Issue:  ROS Hacks
> 
> I've noticed that a lot of times, people implement app specific hacks
> in ROS, or worse, they implement ROS specific hacks in different apps.
>  Both of these are very bad practices.  Instead of doing either of
> these, I'd recommend discussing the problems you find with the other
> developers over the mailing list.  For instance, if app XYZ is
> working, rather than submitting a hackish patch to get it to work,
> find the root cause of the issue, and solve it there or ask for help
> to solve it.
> 
> Third Issue:  Unit Tests
> 
> While there are winetests as well as other small tests, ReactOS (That
> i know of, unless it's in a seperate repo) does not have an official
> testing framework.  Each developer here should take some time out and
> write a test for every api currently supported by windows, make it
> pass on Windows, and then commit it to SVN.  If we all write tests,
> This will help identify bugs in ROS vs Windows.  Low level tests are
> ESPECIALLY needed.  Our driver compatibility currently sucks, and it's
> getting worse every day.  Unit testing for driver specific APIs and
> the HAL would help improve ROS dramatically.
> 
> Final Issue:  Stop mixing user and kernel mode code.
> 
> On occasion i see developers use ReactOS specific kernel mode code in
> userland.  This process should be avoided.  All ROS apps should work
> on both Windows and ROS, and should not contain any ROS specific
> checks,etc.  This goes back to the second issue.
> 
> I look forward to hearing your responses to my opinion, and I hope
> that we can work on getting at least some of these opinions
> implemented so that we may build a truly great Microsoft Windows
> Compatible Alternative!
> 
> Thanks,
> Richard Campbell
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev