'Pending' patches state

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Alexandre Julliard <julliard at winehq.org> wrote:

> The pending state is feedback. It means that the patch is not clearly
> correct, but that it's complicated to articulate exactly why. Like it
> says, you should try to make it more convincing, either by simplifying
> the patch, or writing a test case.

I'm sorry, but that's not a feedback, and casual contributors may even
not be aware of that patch tracking page. And as I mentioned if the patch
already contains the tests it's not really obvious what should be added
in addition. In the light of recent discussions about friendliness to
users in bugzilla, I think that developers deserve at least small fraction
of friendliness as well (Alexandre, you are nice and friendly all the time,
but at least I sometimes feel like sending the patches to a blackwhole).

> For instance your patch 84692 says that "tests confirm that", but you
> don't say which tests, and there are no new tests or fixed todos in the
> patch, so it looks suspicious. Yes, I could dig out the tests myself and
> investigate it in detail, but when it gets to that point I usually just
> move on to the next patch, hence "pending".

There is not much tests for SetParent, and 84692 suggests to look at
the tests added by
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2011-February/098711.html

WM_SHOWWINDOW at the start and at the end of every message sequence
means that ShowWindow() should be used to hide and show the window
during SetParent call processing.

But even the same patch sent another day after the tests
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2011-February/098748.html
didn't get any feedback and died in the pending state.

Taking an opportunity to discuss other my patches :) I'd like to get
a comment to 84685 as well.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry.