msi: Implement the DROP TABLE sql command.

[Rob Shearman]

2008/10/2 Steven Edwards <winehacker at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 3:25 PM, James Hawkins <jhawkins at codeweavers.com> wrote:
>> Hi,  I can't repro this problem on my machine, so I'm sending this
>> patch to patchwatcher by way of wine-patches to get some info.  Please
>> do not apply.
>
> Regarding our wineconf discussion about patchwatcher spam on
> wine-patches and filtering. Perhaps we need 2 email address patches
> can be sent to. My thinking is the flow could be something like:
>
> 1. By default everyone sends a patch to wine-patches
> 2. If a patch gets rejected the author gets a failure mail in private,
> and now retries or testing patches should go to wine-patches-testing N
> times until they get it right
> 3. once its right, patchwatch could then forward the new good patch to
> wine-patches or could send an email to the dev saying that its good
> enough to now send to wine-patches.
>
> Doing it like this, if everyone follows the rules, we won't get a ton
> of patchwatcher retries filling up wine-patches.

I don't like this idea because of the expression "If you gave an
infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters they
would eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare." In other
words, if someone were to just send patches all day to patchwatcher,
changing one thing at a time until they passed then one would
eventually get through. However, the result in this case would
probably not be a quality patch since patchwatcher would not be able
to catch all possible bugs.

We want to be able to track how many retries a patch has had to go
through before getting through since the more it had the more bugs it
is likely to have. Therefore, we want all patchwatcher failures to go
to a separate mailing list where we can see if a patch is being sent
repeatedly so that we can email them to say "hey, you may want to take
a while to rethink this patch or ask for help on wine-devel".

James, please note that I'm not accusing you of being one of said
monkeys, I realise this is an exception :-)

-- 
Rob Shearman