[PATCH 01/10] cmd: Use CSTR_* instead of hardcoded values as result of CompareStringW

Frédéric Delanoy frederic.delanoy at gmail.com
Sat Aug 20 12:50:40 CDT 2011

2011/8/20 Dan Kegel <dank at kegel.com>:
> 2011/8/20 Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy at gmail.com>:
>> So, you should always use the numbering specified by the author IMHO
> I wish it were so easy.  It is very difficult to recognize patch series
> without relying on them being sent in order.
> I've tried:
>  take all unprocessed messages
>  divide them by sender
>  further divide them into groups based on length of patch series in
> subject line
>  sort each group by patch number from subject line
> but that breaks down if the developer sends two patch series with
> the same length, which happens very often, e.g. when somebody
> retries a patch series.  Maybe one could further subdivide messages
> by retry number, but that sounds hard and fragile.

Hmm well we/AJ could institute some rules for resending patch series,
so that the whole series is resubmitted with the same (try N)
"marker", even when only one patch is changed, possibly preceded by a
(resend) [i.e. the subdivision by retry number you're talking about],
and document that in the wiki.

That would probably help a bit, but in that case, there should be a
filter on wine-patches/testbot so it refuses ill-formed messages (like
with (resen*t*), etc.) in order to enforce that rule,
e.g. by checking the subject line with a regexp like  ^.*( resend)?( try \d+)?$

Just my 2 ¢


More information about the wine-devel mailing list