[PATCH v3 03/10] reg: Add system error printing function

[Jonathan Vollebregt]

Stefan's reviewed the first 7 from my patchset: 
https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2014-November/105761.html

I was waiting for Hugh's patch to be committed so I could rebase (Or for 
mine to be committed) but if nothings going to happen I'll just resubmit.

On 12/12/2014 02:06 PM, Indrek Altpere wrote:
> Seems that the patches have reached the magical "1 month" limit where they
> disappear from the list silently.
>
> Last I saw, your patchset contained about 8 or 10 patches?
> Not sure if the best suggestion by official rules/guidelines, but perhaps it
> would be possible to add the new stuff in multiple, smaller patchsets,
> instead of one mega-patchset?
>
> It would mean that reviewers don't have to dig around in hundreds of lines
> of code changes that change a lot of functionality, makes it hard to keep
> track of all of it and review it thoroughly.
> Many big patchsets have gotten stalled like that: reviewer notices a few
> things, notifies developer, developer makes the changes, sends the changed
> full patchset again, reviewer checks full patchset again, finds more stuff
> in next files (or even the same files), notifies developer and so on and so
> on.
> Sometimes multiple reviewers also cause havoc, because due to many coding
> rules not being written down (http://wiki.winehq.org/SubmittingPatches
> contains general and vague guidelines, but essentially 0 hard examples) and
> each reviewer having a bit different viewpoint about what styling issues are
> could-be or should-be, so sending a huge set will end up with responses
> "here's about ~10 things wrong with your code" and like that after each
> submit.
>
> As I understand, someone correct me if I'm wrong, there is currently also no
> active reg component maintainer, who would be able to review things quickly,
> so smaller patchset would probably help things move along much faster?
>
> About https://source.winehq.org/patches/data/107580 getting stalled, I have
> no clue/opinion, does not seem to be overly complex?
>
> Regards,
> Indrek Altpere
>
>