manual patch tracking system for ntdll

[thomas.mertes at gmx.at]

Hello

Since I am following the ntdll development, I noticed some
not applied patches:

- Ntdll atom stuff:
  http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-patches/2003/04/0064.html

- Ntdll atom tests.
  http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-patches/2003/04/0065.html
  The tests where verified by Dmitry Timoshkov in this mail:
  http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2003/04/0192.html

- Resend: Implement some ACE functions
  http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-patches/2003/04/0129.html

IMHO, if a patch is correct (can be verified by tests) it should be applied,
even if no application needs this functions (at the moment). If this
functions are needed later, some implementation (with FIXMEs) is
already there as base for further development. This is easier than
looking for a (possibly outdated) patch in the archieves.

I see the wine source also as a information repository, which is
easier to access, than a patch archive. In the worst case it should
be possible that a function is accepted but deactivated with #ifdef.

Greetings
Thomas Mertes

-- 
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more  http://www.gmx.net +++
Bitte lächeln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!