[Portland] why not a CLI?

[Dan Kegel]

On 3/3/06, Jeremy White <jwhite at codeweavers.com> wrote:
> > Maybe we need both.
>
> I think that's the reality; but given an API, the CLI
> tools should be trivial, and useful test programs, right?

Yes.  How the CLI apps are implemented isn't
as important as that they exist.
There's no reason to wait for the API, though;
the CLI apps can be prototyped separately.
And I wouldn't be surprised if they were the
first tangible result of the portland effort,
followed later by the protocol or api approaches.
- Dan

--
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv