Suggestions for improvement of the emulator

[Francois Gouget]

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote:

> Juan Lang wrote:
>> What this misses is the most common status that causes us all to argue:
>> uncomitted, because Alexandre's not sure about it.  Perhaps he has a gut
>> feeling that the approach is not right, but hasn't taken the time to
>> identify any particular flaw.  Perhaps it merits additional thought. 
>> Perhaps it's too big to review quickly.  Perhaps he hopes the submitter
>> will realize it's not up to snuff, and resubmit a better patch.
>
> So what? just set "Rejected, reason: tests needed" or "will review later" or 
> whatever.

Yeah, maybe a very generic 'Needs review' email to wine-devel would be 
enough. It would also be the clue to the other Wine developpers:
  * that you're not going to be duplicating Alexandre's work if you
    review this patch
  * to look at the patch, dissect it to see what is wrong
  * if it is in your domain of competence and it looks good, post an
    approval message
  * to test the patch
  * and help its author get it accepted

And the reason I'm proposing a very generic message is so Alexandre does 
not have to spend time to pinpoint exactly what is wrong with the patch 
(otherwise he could just as well send a detailed message). As Alexandre 
once mentioned at WineConf, patches that get 'ignored' are those he is 
not sure about, or that would take too long to review (e.g. because of 
size) so that he goes on with the smaller/obvious patches first hoping 
to come back to the tricky ones later. But the result is that the tricky 
patches get to the bottom of the pile with the new patches piling on 
top. So assuming these are still in his 'pending' mailbox, maybe 
Alexandre could send this generic 'Needs review' message for all patches 
that are more than one or two days old in his mailbox.

Another thing he mentioned at WineConf is that it is ok to ask 'why was 
my patch not committed?'. Just don't do it an hour after posting the 
patch of course<g>, wait a day or two. I wonder if this is well 
documented...


-- 
Francois Gouget         fgouget at free.fr        http://fgouget.free.fr/
           tcA thgirypoC muinelliM latigiD eht detaloiv tsuj evah uoY