Patchwatcher online

[Paul Vriens]

Dan Kegel wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Vijay Kiran Kamuju <infyquest at gmail.com> wrote:
>> When running tests for the patch, I think we should just run the tests
>> of the dlls that are affected direct;y or indirectly by that change.
>> its running the tests for entire wine, which is very time consuming.
> 
> True, but hey, it was easier to code.  And getting anything like this
> working at all is pretty hard.  Figuring out which tests a give
> patch affects is an extra challenge I'd rather not face just now.
> Once it's up and working well we can refine it.

I'd argue that testing just the affected dll is correct. What about things like 
patches to ntdll/kernel32/advapi32 (and the likes). They could influence far 
more tests then just the ones for it's own dll.

-- 
Cheers,

Paul.