New bugzilla components.

[James Hawkins]

On Dec 16, 2007 3:37 PM, Kai Blin <kai.blin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 16 December 2007 21:14:16 James Hawkins wrote:
>
> > Ok, I'll start off the list.  This is a first draft, open to changes
> > and discussion.  Entries with a (?) means I'm not sure.
> >
> > Components:
> [...]
> > wine-net ->
> If you delete that one, we definitely need a "winsock" component. Or ws2_32...
> or wsock.. I prefer "winsock" as that matches the debug channel as well.
>

ws2_32 or wsock32, or both, depending on the existing bugs.

> [...]
> > wine-sspi -> (?) I prefer individual modules with a security or sspi
> > keyword, but it's not up to me
> [...]
> > -> secur32
>
> Coming to think about that, if we're fine to add more categories for things
> like secur32.dll, how about splitting up those by debug channel? E.g. my ntlm
> provider has an "ntlm" debug channel, the kerberos provider that I keep
> starting and restarting in some branches on my box always uses "kerberos",
> and Juan might want to use schannel as debug channel.
>
> That would also help advanced users to correctly file bugs according to
> fixmes, e.g. if they run into an unimplemented function.
>
>

I have to voice my disagreement on this one.  per-debug channel is too
fine-grained, and that's a road we don't want to go down.  Think of it
like this: the components are not meant to help the users in any way,
only the developers.  As a developer, will the different provider
components (ntlm, kerberos, et.al.) help you any?  You'll have to read
the logs anyway.  schannel, on the other hand, is a module in the wine
tree, so that would be a useful component.

-- 
James Hawkins