31 Dec
2009
31 Dec
'09
12:47 p.m.
On 12/30/2009 03:21 AM, Julius Schwartzenberg wrote:
This patch depends on Detlef Riekenberg's patch
from June 2008 and
expects it to have been applied:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2008-June/056310.html
It was not committed due to bug 14085:
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14085
Can't you just submit that initial test framework with the 3 imports (if
all 3 are indeed needed)? The bug will of course not be closed but at
least some of your work could be committed.
--
Cheers,
Paul.
1 Jan
1 Jan
8:18 p.m.
New subject: [1/7] avifile: Initial test data and simple test for avifil32 depends
Paul Vriens wrote:
On 12/30/2009 03:21 AM, Julius Schwartzenberg wrote:
My work (and Detlef's too I think) only needs avifil32 and importing
that, as Detlef suggested, was the way I was able to test things.
I understand that Alexandre would not accept such a patch though.
Otherwise I would say Detlef's patch should be submitted with this
import so that my patches can be committed on top of that.
I think it was also stupid of me to send all the patches as a serie,
while they do not actually depend on each other. I'm not sure though how
I would submit the patches next time. Should I send the tests depending
on each other in a separate serie from the actual fixes or is the right
way actually to send a fix with it's test in the same serie?
Thanks,
Julius
This patch depends on Detlef Riekenberg's
patch from June 2008 and
expects it to have been applied:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2008-June/056310.html
It was not committed due to bug 14085:
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14085
Can't you just submit that initial test framework with the 3 imports (if
all 3 are indeed needed)? The bug will of course not be closed but at
least some of your work could be committed. 
9:11 p.m.
New subject: [1/7] avifile: Initial test data and simple test for avifil32 depends
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Julius Schwartzenberg
<julius.schwartzenberg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think it was also stupid of me to send all the
patches as a serie, while
they do not actually depend on each other. I'm not sure though how I would
submit the patches next time. Should I send the tests depending on each
other in a separate serie from the actual fixes or is the right way actually
to send a fix with it's test in the same serie?
It's better to send the test in first, in case the fix isn't
committed. As for the series, if the patches don't depend on each
other, there's no need to make a series, though it doesn't hurt
anything.
--
-Austin
3 Jan
3 Jan
1:22 p.m.
New subject: [1/7] avifile: Initial test data and simple test for avifil32 depends
On 01/01/2010 10:11 PM, Austin English wrote:
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Julius Schwartzenberg
<julius.schwartzenberg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It does hurt to make independent patches into a patch series: if
Alexandre rejects one patch in the series that will block the rest of
the patches.
bye
michael
I think it was also stupid of me to send all the
patches as a serie, while
they do not actually depend on each other. I'm not sure though how I would
submit the patches next time. Should I send the tests depending on each
other in a separate serie from the actual fixes or is the right way actually
to send a fix with it's test in the same serie?
It's better to send the test in first, in case the fix isn't
committed. As for the series, if the patches don't depend on each
other, there's no need to make a series, though it doesn't hurt
anything.
5252
days inactive
5255
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Austin English -
Julius Schwartzenberg -
Michael Stefaniuc -
Paul Vriens