On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 10:54, Francois Gouget wrote:
> I believe that's why Gregory proposed to fork their code: because he
> just wants a 100% open-source way to run .Net apps in Wine and thus for
> him the hard-dependency on Wine is not an issue.
>
> Can Mono work on Windows? Or, in other words,
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Mike Hearn wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:17:55 -0600, Gregory M. Turner wrote:
> > Mono is LGPL/X11 (except the compiler) so we could beat them at their own game
> > by forking /their/ code, turning it into a winelib app, and implementing
> > Windows.Forms properly ;)
>
> It
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:17:55 -0600, Gregory M. Turner wrote:
> Mono is LGPL/X11 (except the compiler) so we could beat them at their own game
> by forking /their/ code, turning it into a winelib app, and implementing
> Windows.Forms properly ;)
It's not that simple. Unsurprisingly they don't wan
On Thursday 22 January 2004 12:05 am, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> Jeremy White wrote:
> >>Did any one contact Xaim to see if they can send any MONO people to
> >>wineconf?
> >>Is there any vision on how these 2 integrate?
> >> I haven't even touched MONO yet (& .NET for that mater), but from the
> >>loo
Jeremy White wrote:
Did any one contact Xaim to see if they can send any MONO people to
wineconf?
Is there any vision on how these 2 integrate?
I haven't even touched MONO yet (& .NET for that mater), but from the
look of it they better use wine for some areas of .NET. Like .Forms.
And certainl
> Did any one contact Xaim to see if they can send any MONO people to
> wineconf?
> Is there any vision on how these 2 integrate?
> I haven't even touched MONO yet (& .NET for that mater), but from the
> look of it they better use wine for some areas of .NET. Like .Forms.
> And certainly Wine L
> > As for wine vs Crossover -- I presume that "plain old wine" users are welcome
> > to participate? If so, then there really isn't a problem.
>
> As long as they are talking about usage under CrossOver. We really don't
> want to confuse our customers.
That's a bit stronger than I would put it
On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 10:55, Gregory M. Turner wrote:
> Looks great to me; although there are not any discussions yet (or are there?)
> in the "forums" area to demonstrate the quality of the forum interface, if
> it's something along the lines of phpBB, then it's perfect.
It's hard to compete wi
On Tuesday 20 January 2004 08:05 am, Jeremy Newman wrote:
> From the desk of Jeremy White (who is at LinuxWorld ATM).
>
> Hey folks,
>
> We've just launched a major new initiative, the
> CodeWeavers CrossOver Compatibility Center.
>
> You can check it out at
> http://www.codeweavers.com/site/comp
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 09:36:02 +, you wrote:
> > Output attached, a graph produced with gnumeric is on
> > http://home.wanadoo.nl/~wijn/wine/cvs.png
>
> Hmm, there doesn't seem to be any particular trend upwards, does there,
> except perhaps a slight one towards the end. 1998 was a busy year, I
> Output attached, a graph produced with gnumeric is on
> http://home.wanadoo.nl/~wijn/wine/cvs.png
Hmm, there doesn't seem to be any particular trend upwards, does there,
except perhaps a slight one towards the end. 1998 was a busy year, I
wonder what was going on then.
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 20:24:54 +, you wrote:
> > and where we've come to from there, and I think it's doable.
> > I think it's particularly doable if Desktop Linux continues to
> > accelerate and we get a bunch more help to make it happen...
>
> Ah yes, exponentially scalable growth. Let's hope
Steven Edwards wrote:
.depends on what happens at Wineconf.
PS. The goal 95% of all Windows apps on crossover is nice but I am
afraid I am seeing more and more .Nyet apps out in the real world. For
this to happen anytime soon we have to get on the ball with Mono and Windows.Forms.
Mike Hearn wrote:
Ah yes, exponentially scalable growth. Let's hope so. Graphs of cvs
commits/patch sizes would be neat. I might stick that on my (long) todo
list :)
Here is one, http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-devel/2001/11/0149.html
(Wine source code size) its two years old but it's still n
On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 19:56, Jeremy White wrote:
> Further, note that I
> didn't say it would run 95% of all apps *perfectly*. That, I
> think, is too much.
Ah. The small print comes out ;)
> I think back to 23 months ago when Wine barely could run MS Office,
Was it really only two years ago? A
> "We are confident that Wine has matured to the point that CrossOver will
> run 95% of all Windows applications by the end of 2005."
>
> Uh, guys, are you sure that isn't over-optimistic? I mean, it seems that Wine is
> moving
> faster than ever before and that's great, but do you have any
> har
Hiya,
> We've also, we hope, set the stage for a major new Wine
> related initiative - we hope to encourage lots of ISVs
> to certify their apps against Wine.
Yes this is REALLY needed but.
> The rationale for this is pretty simple - apps won't run
> on Wine as well as they do on Windows
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 08:05:32 -0600, Jeremy Newman wrote:
> We've also, we hope, set the stage for a major new Wine related
> initiative - we hope to encourage lots of ISVs to certify their apps
> against Wine.
Cool! But.
"We are confident that Wine has matured to the point that CrossOver will
>From the desk of Jeremy White (who is at LinuxWorld ATM).
Hey folks,
We've just launched a major new initiative, the
CodeWeavers CrossOver Compatibility Center.
You can check it out at
http://www.codeweavers.com/site/compatibility/
but I think it's fair to describe it as the appdb
on steroids
19 matches
Mail list logo
