On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 5:38 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 4/16/2010 9:59 AM, Garrett Serack wrote:
>> For Library packages (static and dynamic) I’m wondering if we shouldn’t
>> just put both variants in the same package—still installing the WinSxS
>> binaries appropriately, and putting the
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Well, that was the idea...
>
> I suppose that typical config.h files might differ between the two, but other
> than that, I can't think of a case where the header files would be different.
>
>
> But, it's not a *requirement*, just a
> lack
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:11 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 4/16/2010 11:07 AM, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Garrett Serack
>> wrote:
>>> Well, that was the idea...
>>>
>>> I suppose that typical config.h files mi
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Um, both can be *concurrently* installed, they have different target
> directories;
>
> It sounds like sharing anything between them isn't worth it; I'd rather not
> have to over-engineer multi-arch config.h files, and the ilk.
>
> So, nev
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> I'm not aware of a way to have user installs of WinSXS libraries. By
> definition, they are system level.
>
> However, we could just require the installer client to be installed and setup
> as admin, and have it run its service at a higher
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> And really, that's how Windows Update works anyway... we might as well learn
> from that.
WU doesn't install code published by third-parties, does it?
> Without that, we'd be forced to Admin-only installs of shared libraries,
> since the
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> What specifically do you mean by compromised?
Suppose it contains a trojan.
> If you mean that a package is published and someone is trying to pass it off
> as someone else's package, well that's why we have a requirement for a
> publish
2010/4/16 Pierre Joye :
> I'm not sure the development files should end in a common directory.
> As it has been mentioned in this thread, it will not be possible to
> have multiple versions of a library. However I'm really not sure that
> the development files and the distribution package should fo
Is a create a lib how-to available?
One that says what files should be generated, how those should be named, etc?
Lots of libs come with outdated .vcproj files that are usually hand
made and lacking some configurations.
A project generator sounds like a good idea.
Olaf
__
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Not done yet, but in the pipeline.
>
> My first priority is to set the specification for what the packages look
> like, and then move on to making tools that assist developers in making
> packages.
Isn't creating packages way more comple
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Garrett Serack
> wrote:
>> I wouldn’t say "way more"...
>>
>> But knowing what the target is, we can build the tools to get there.
>>
>> Hence:
>> - Figure out what the packages will look like
>> -
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> [recycling back to the list … make sure you use reply-all :) ]
Might be a good idea to setup the list such that this is the default
(via reply-to header).
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpa
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Not really. Well--maybe--but not in the way you think, and likely this won't
> happen for a bit.
>
> Portable applications rely on a total lack of shared libraries; rather the
> complete autonomous packaging of everything needed to accomp
Libs: bzip2, z, jpeg, png, ogg, vorbis, boost, DX SDK, Windows SDK.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
>
>
> Howdy folks,
>
>
>
> I’m doing some initial work for long term planning today—really this will
> help drive my focus over the next year or two.
>
> Assuming that CoApp p
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Ted Bullock wrote:
>
>> There are some other things too, for instance there is a bunch of
>> functionality missing from the Microsoft C runtime such as asprintf. It
>> would be nice to have an additional CoApp C
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> Never happens on Linux, and isn't (forced) to be happening here.
>
> Windows is not linux, it has its constraints (and advantages) that
> force developers to actually do the builds as well. Whether these
> binaries will be packaged or distribut
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Olaf van der Spek
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
>>>> Never happens on Linux, and isn't (forced) to be happening here.
>>>
>>> Wi
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 9:19 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 5/5/2010 12:22 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Olaf van der Spek
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Who said CoApp won't support first-party builds?
>>
>> Nobody, I cal
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 9:45 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 5/5/2010 2:41 PM, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
>>
>> What kind of build options are we talking about?
>> For some projects this might be a problem, but I think there are
>> enough projects for which
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 9:45 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>
>> CoApp seeks to be one very specific way to do it. If it happens to work for
>> the
>> upstream project, wonderful :) If not, it's open source, and when it's
>> broke w
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Tom Hanrahan wrote:
> A *nix utility may be a good idea anyway, but we have programs in place for
> developers who need/want a copy of Windows for their test and development
> work. Anyone in the OSTC (Garrett, me, others) can help you get the
> resources or access
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Rivera, Rafael wrote:
> There are also fully functional 30/90/180+ day trials freely downloadable.
> No excuse really.
Trialware is not a (long term) solution.
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-develop
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Trent Nelson wrote:
>> >> What kind of build options are we talking about?
>> >> For some projects this might be a problem, but I think there are
>> >> enough projects for which this will not be a problem.
>> >
>> > Optimization flags, availability of .pdb debugging
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Trent Nelson wrote:
>> > I remember how much trouble I had trying to get the out-of-the-
>> box Windows builds of BerkeleyDB and TclTk to work with
>> Python. BerkeleyDB was using the most esoteric compiler and
>> linker flags that I've ever come across, and the r
Hey,
Did everybody have a good flight? Turns out I was back just in time,
the volcano ashes were over the Netherlands again today.
Is there any code in the VCS yet? If so, I can't find it.
--
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-develo
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:15 AM, Rivera, Rafael
wrote:
> Hey Olaf,
>
> Glad to hear you made it home in time! I think last we all spoke, we
> needed a license before code could be committed. I'm sure that's on
> Garrett's long TODO list.
Ok. I remember C was chosen for the engine. What's the rati
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:23 AM, Elizabeth M Smith
wrote:
> As we discussed during the summit and is mentioned on the wiki:
Ah, found it.
> Few dependencies
> Fast
> Small
> Binding facilities for most high level languages are common
>
> The ability to tie a C library into anything and everythin
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Ted Bullock wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Jonathan Ben-Joseph
> wrote:
>> This is because C truly is the least common denominator when it comes to
>> language binding, almost every mainstream language can call directly into C
>> shared libraries witho
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:38 AM, Elizabeth M Smith
wrote:
>> C++ can do C bindings as well, can't it? Our bindings should certainly be
>> C.
>> Doesn't C++ share the other advantages?
>>
>> Olaf
>>
>
> What? I mean binding coapp to other higher level languages primarily
> written in C. Perl, Pyt
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Yes, we'd like to have a tiny bootstrap DLL that gets us the engine DLL, and
> the bootstrap can ship in every MSI.
>
> The bootstrap will be VERY small ( < 2048 bytes ).
>
> The engine DLL we'd like to keep as small as possible too.
Aren'
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> If I thought that we were gaining large leaps in productivity for 50k, I
> wouldn't have too much of a problem with it.
I'm used to C++, I think others are used to C. Having manual string
and memory handling isn't my ideal.
I'm fine with
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Adam Baxter wrote:
> How does Ubuntu do all of their packages?
>
> I don't think they need to all have the co- prefix because by being linked
> to the CoApp project we know the context of them.
>
> Namespace conflicts?
Olaf
__
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Adam Baxter wrote:
> 50k multiplied by how many downloads/packages? ;)
This is about the engine, not about the tiny action DLL that'll be in
each packet.
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Rob Mensching wrote:
> Note that the game explorer install/uninstall/repair/upgrade/patch/rollback
> in the WiX toolset is actually implemented by a Custom Action. We call it
> one of the "WiX Standard Custom Actions".
> It's hard to write Custom Actions correctly
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Trent Nelson wrote:
> Now, this is the point that my 15 minutes of experience with OData let me
> down. The C# approach for whipping up both metadata and data seems, er, to
> not be particularly flexible.
Why? Code to read the data from (XML) file should be doabl
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Trent Nelson wrote:
>
> Slightly belated, but I'd just like to thank Microsoft and Garrett for the
> CoApp event that's just past. It's fantastic to see a company like
> Microsoft covering the (very sizable) cost for an event like this. It was
> great to attend a
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Just build a sql server database. It's not that heavy!
We could also use Postgres to stay with the open source spirit. :p
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Trent Nelson wrote:
>
> I vaguely recall a brief discussion about -dev derivatives of open source
> packages during the event, i.e. python-2.6.1.1-dev. I think the consensus
> was that they weren't required, with -src packages being preferable.
No, the idea was t
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Trevor Dennis wrote:
>> We could also use Postgres to stay with the open source spirit. :p
> I'd second this motion. It's BSD based and hopefully would not cost us
> anything if Canonical can
> host it for us.
>
> SQL Server might be a gift from Microsoft today, b
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Elizabeth Smith
wrote:
> Yes - this is the repository - where we're storing the coapp stuff... but
> this should also be implementable by others (in other ways) as long as they
> allow access in a standard way. So it doesn't matter if we implement things
> in C# a
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> /facepalm
>
> I think we'll select technologies based on what makes sense technologically.
> If we're writing the server part in C# anyway, SQL Server is quick, fast and
> well, cheap. (I have pull with the company that makes it)
I'm not
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Rob Mensching wrote:
> Everything in the core WiX namespace does map cleanly to the Windows
> Installer layer. The Game Explorer stuff you mentioned comes from an
> extension because the Windows Installer does not support Game Explorer
> natively (and thus a Custom
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Rob Mensching wrote:
> Agreed.
>
> I've also mentioned to Garrett a couple times that it would be *awesome* if
> all (most?) custom actions were written generally and contributed to the WiX
> toolset so that others can take advantage of the addition even if they
>
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Rob Mensching wrote:
> Agreed.
>
> I've also mentioned to Garrett a couple times that it would be *awesome* if
> all (most?) custom actions were written generally and contributed to the WiX
> toolset so that others can take advantage of the addition even if they
>
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Rivera, Rafael
wrote:
> On 5/20/2010 4:03 PM, Trent Nelson wrote:
>> I'm perplexed why anyone would want to forgo the advantages of C++ for
>> C; I can make my C++ DLLs just as small as C ones. And, like, what if
>> I want a linked list, or a hash, or a set, are
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
>
>
> I’m trying to prioritize all the crap on my plate, and I don’t want to drop
> anything so I need everyone who is blocking on something from me, to reply
> to this mail with ONE or TWO items they need from me, and the prior
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Seo Sanghyeon wrote:
> I came across http://takeoffgw.sourceforge.net/ which seems to be relevant.
>
> Thoughts?
What are yours?
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-develo
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Trent Nelson wrote:
> On 02/06/2010 13:24, Trent Nelson wrote:
>>
>> On 6/2/2010 1:06 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
>>>
>>> Does anyone have pictures of the whiteboards taken at the summit?
>>>
>>> I need them. Badly.
>>
>> I'll see if I can wrestle them off my iPhone n
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Ah, she did reply but to me directly:
Don't you love the lack of a reply-to header? ;)
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpa
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> !WAKE UP!
>
> Been awake for 11 hours already...
What's up?
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https:/
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Mark Stone wrote:
> You are going to want something like:
> coapp --dep lists the other packages on which the named
> package is dependent.
And --rdep to list reverse dependencies.
A way to specify what version you want to install.
A way to specify what install t
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Hmmm..
>
> Reverse dependencies could be a computationally expensive operation :D ...
> Well, once there are thousands of packages.
>
> Is there a really useful case for that? Really?
Yes. If you're a library it might be useful to know whi
Hey guys,
I don't see any activity on the mailing list or in the repository.
What are we waiting for?
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Oddly enough, this is what they call “desired behavior”.
>
>
>
> Actually, we use the same thing at Microsoft.. reply replies directly to
> the person, reply all is for the discussion.
>
>
Get used to using Reply All by default...
Garrett,
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> I know where the switch is… What’s wrong with HTML emails?
There's no need for it and together with top and Outlook's quoting
style it's annoying.
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~c
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Trevor Dennis wrote:
> Gmail, Thunderbird, etc, have top replying as well. It's just more natural
> to read the reply right away instead of scrolling down hundreds of lines of
> message to get to a reply.
> I don't have a problem with HTML, just that some people l
2010/7/27 Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) :
> Complain to the mail clients, not us. Frankly, it is ridiculously annoying
> to re-order my replies.
Why is that?
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.lau
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Trevor Dennis wrote:
> I think the main reason that top posting works for email and not for other
> mediums like forums is for the simple reason that I'm already tracking this
> conversation actively and I already know what's been said. So I don't want
> to read it
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Elizabeth M Smith
wrote:
> In other news - how come we have all these mails about this and none about
> actual code
I've been wondering about that too.
Looked at the VCS a couple of times but didn't see any updates. :(
Olaf
__
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Does anyone **REALLY** find that precompiled headers are worth the
> $%*(ing headaches?
>
> Can't you ask the VC compiler devs? They've probably got better stats than
we have.
That said, for small projects they might not provide much benefi
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> I’m not sure I care what they think/hear/know…
>
>
>
> They also tell us that there isn’t many people asking for C99.
Who needs C99 when there's C++0x? :p
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpa
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Ted Bullock wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I just committed a couple hours of thought towards the coapp-engine to:
>
> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~tbullock/coapp-engine/experiment/changes
Hi Ted,
Just a few quick comments from a scan of the code. Haven't compiled it yet:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Rivera, Rafael wrote:
> And waste two bytes?! Silly ANSI and ISO C standards.
Only one if you use Linux EOLs. ;)
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launch
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Ted Bullock wrote:
>>> '\\ No newline at end of file'
>>
>> Might be a good idea to add this newline to every file. A shame VS
>> doesn't do this by default...
>
> Is this really important? Why would we need a new line at the end of the file?
No, but
http://bazaar
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> It's important to note that content outside the embedded CAB files are not
> compressed (so any data/metadata in the MSI tables for example) and that it's
> probably compressing that pretty good (that data is often a lot of text, and
> sh
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Rivera, Rafael
wrote:
> It's as designed.
Then when will the design be improved?
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://l
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> MSI files are actually Windows Structured Storage files
> (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa380369%28v=VS.85%29.aspx).
>
> In order that older tools and OSes can read them, they really can't change
> the fundamentals of how the fi
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:15 PM, Eric Schultz wrote:
> In my experience with simple MSIs that I've zipped, you don't gain very much
> since the actual files are already compressed. I think custom actions are
> uncompressed so to the best of my knowledge that'd be the largest
> non-compressed port
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Elizabeth M Smith
wrote:
> Heh - this may get REALLY fun when you get to say... a database or a web app
> with data lying around... Are we going to provide some way to migrate that
> data during an "upgrade" - cause if not we'll have some pretty angry users.
> "My
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Elizabeth M Smith
wrote:
> I was referring to the fact that by default the data directory for mysql
> installs is in the application directory
> So if you didn't "upgrade" but instead installed both side by side, it would
> have a new blank data directory
> And the
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Elizabeth M Smith
wrote:
> The point I was trying to make is that other applications will have similar
> issues and not all are smart enough to have a conf file to specify it (and
> what if the user changes the location?) - we need some kind of way for the
If the
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Adam Baxter wrote:
> Nope.
Is there any reason our code wouldn't run on IA64 (or other archs)?
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscr
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Eric Schultz wrote:
> Wait now, what's going on with x64?
x64 won't run on ia64...
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launc
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Philip Allison
wrote:
> Is __int64 the most preferred type for large file support? Having had to
I'd use long long.
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.la
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Elizabeth M Smith
wrote:
> Um... there is no long long on windows
Says who?
We're not using VC6 are we?
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
U
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Well, Windows APIs use LONG which is a typedef to long .. (clever, eh?)
> The CRT uses long for things like fseek.
> off_t is another typedef to long
> I suppose I should have said long instead of __int64 -- but I have a soft
> spot for being
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> knowing that 64bits is plenty enough for file sizes, I think we should
> standardize on __int64 where we can.
__int64 is reasonable, although long long is standard.
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https:
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Olaf's doin' his job by making sure we mean what we say. :D ... Thanks Olaf!
You're welcome!
BTW, how's mkProject coming along?
I remember back in April you said the first packages (like libz) would
take a few weeks. ;)
Olaf
__
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Just a reminder to those who lurk, a bunch of us are often on IRC on
> irc.freenode.net (#coapp).
>
>
irc://irc.freenode.net/coapp ;)
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Well, like my life... things are happening in a slightly different order.
Ah, we're supporting out-of-order execution. :p
> Eric Schultz is rockin' away on mkProject, which looks like we're not too far
> away from having in a state that we
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Oh, and this is also a pretty example of programming in C# like it was Perl.
I guess it won't pass the code review then. :p
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> - The code I’m working on:
>
> o the native CoApp-Bootstrap exe that gets embedded into each MSI. This
> will be done in the next couple of days so we can build some test packages.
>
> o I finished a test EXE and DLL maker that
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> mkProject is on hold until I get back from Europe. I'll be back on it around
> October 3rd.
As long as it's done before my birthday it's fine with me.
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.n
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 4:23 AM, John McNamee wrote:
> Does anybody outside of Microsoft really like MSI? Wouldn’t a package
> format based on ZIP archives be a better cultural fit for open source
> software? I know MSI is the supported method for installing SxS
> assemblies. For the sake of di
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Philip Allison
wrote:
> There is a use case for creating a minimal, stand-alone version of a
> particular package, bundling just what it needs into a deployable
> image, but I can't remember what conclusions have been reached about
> that.
Sometimes a single exe is
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Trevor Dennis wrote:
> One of the main goals of the CoApp project though is to reduce code
> duplication.
> For example, we want to get down to only one copy of ZLIB.DLL on a computer
> with all applications using that single copy. If projects start statically
> li
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> Are there any plans for CoApp to feature crashdump collection? Will it be
> handled by going through Windows Error Reporting/WinQual? (if so how will it
> be handled for all those who cant afford the $500 price tag of the VeriSign
> certifi
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> I just thought I’d drop a note about the progress I’m making on mkSpec
> (the tool that takes source code and generates compiler-independent build
> data from it… which is a short jump from project files & make files. :D)
>
>
mkSpec isn't n
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Yeah, that’s one of the intended visual effects--
>
>
>
> On one hand, it’s a pretty geometric shape.
>
>
>
> On the other hand it’s a cube minus a cube.
>
>
Or a cube plus a cube from the other point of view.
Olaf
Happy New Year to everybody!
Garrett, maybe it'd be a good idea to post an updated roadmap / timeline /
project status.
Greetings,
Olaf
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 9:46 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Just an FYI, I’ve pushed a lot of changes to a lot of the managed
> projects (toolkit, etc)
>
>
>
>
.
>
>
>
> *Garrett* *Serack* | Open Source Software Developer | *Microsoft
> Corporation *
>
> *I don't make the software you use; I make the software you use better on
> Windows.*
>
>
>
> *From:* Olaf van der Spek [mailto:olafvds...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wedn
Hi,
It's off-topic (probably), but does anyone know where one can submit
Win32 API feedback, like feature requests? For VS, there's Connect,
but I don't know what the right place is for the Win32 API.
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Rafael Rivera
wrote:
> They don't take Win32 feedback, nice try ;)
That sucks. Why's that?
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Rafael Rivera
wrote:
> Given the various intricacies of the API, I don't think it's an area where
> general consumer feedback would be useful.
No, but developer feedback is something else.
> You can try posting in the Windows SDK sub-forum, probably the best cha
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Philip Allison
wrote:
> You use the word server, but then mention ASP and Orchard (which I hadn't
> heard of, but appears to be a CMS framework). I am confused. What nature
> of beastie are we talking about here?
ASP is a server-side language, what's the confus
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> I’ll be publishing our first binaries next week (command line package
> installer, trace, scan mkPackage tools, engine, and my little Quicktool )
When is next week? :p
Olaf
___
Mailing list: htt
Hi,
Why does every tool have it's own repo on LP?
Having all tools in a single repo seems much handier.
--
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpa
Hi,
On quotes, the footer gets quoted too. This is not normal. Why is this
happening?
--
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~coapp-devel
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> That may just be Outlook Web Access...
Who would ever use that? :p
Could the footer be reduced to one line (just
https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers)?
--
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://la
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Garrett Serack wrote:
> Second part of my Event Binding series : "Binding Events to .NET 4.0 Tasks
> instead of Objects (Part 2)" http://j.mp/fDUtbH
Can we build packages yet?
--
Olaf
___
Mailing list: https://launchp
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
