| I recently tried to submit application feedback for the Darwin port of Wine. My feedback was rejected because Darwine is not Wine. But is this really the case? If this port of Wine to Darwin was simply called The Darwin Port of Wine, would it have been rejected? I don't think it would have been. Just because the Darwin developers have made a clever alias for this particular port, it is now rejected as not being Wine. All Darwine is, is Wine ported to Darwin. Darwine has some major patches to it that have not been added to Wine CVS. This should not be a reason to reject Darwine as a standard Wine port. A port of Wine to Darwin and Mac OS X will benefit both Mac users and Wine development. But such a port will require major patches to Wine. The question is, should these patches be added to Wine CVS while the Darwin port of Wine is unstable or stable? Because Wine has already gone beta, it would be unwise to add these major patches while the Darwin port is unstable. But eventually they will have to be added either by the Darwine developers or by someone else. Although it is not ready to have its patches added to Wine CVS, it should still be thought of as a standard port of Wine. Because Darwine is nothing more than another port of Wine. I request that the Darwine i386 build be added to the Wine Binary Downloads page with a disclaimer that it is in early development. This will encourage more downloads and more development of both Wine and this particular port of Wine. The Darwin and Mac OS X port of Wine Respectfully Yours, Alex Eagar |
_______________________________________________ wine-users mailing list wine-users@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wine-users
