ntdll: Improve stub of NtQueryEaFile.

[Marcus Meissner]

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:35:47AM +0200, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Alexandre,
> 
> On 06/11/2015 10:14 AM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> > Sebastian Lackner <sebastian at fds-team.de> writes:
> > 
> >> I never encouraged anyone to give up on WineHQ, and I also haven't given up
> >> WineHQ myself. If you mean the fact that Fedora switched to Wine Staging, I
> >> even advised them against doing this, when they contacted us about a year ago.
> >> In fact I would love to see a huge amount of our patches go upstream, and to
> >> work more directly together with upstream developers, with the common goal to
> >> make Wine better for the whole community.
> > 
> > I don't mean Fedora, though that's probably not a good thing either. My
> > problem is the whole parallel process thing. In order for me and other
> > devs to understand what's going on with your patches, we would now have
> > to follow two bug trackers, two IRC channels, two mailing lists, github,
> > etc.  And of course it's even more confusing for users, who won't
> > understand the distinction between the two.
> > 
> > Why not use the tools we already have (and improve them if they are
> > insufficient)?  If you truly want to work with upstream developers, why
> > are you not discussing your patches on wine-devel or #winehackers?
> That is partly history as Wine Staging started from the pipelight
> project. And partly because from the beginning Wine Staging was seen as
> an evil fork by some core Wine developers which has no place on the
> "true Wine" infrastructure and thus was met with active hostility.
> 
> But I agree, e.g. it is really stupid that Wine Staging has to spin up
> their own bugzilla. But what should they do else when the user bugs are
> closed on bugs.winehq.org with RESOLVED INVALID "evil 3rd party fork"
> even though the bug is in upstream Wine too. And that is not helped by
> you being "not convinced" and people having to prove them self before
> you giving out access on the official winehq infrastructure.

I just looked at wine staging git.

It is basically a Wine fork already.

ls patches/|wc -l
228
ls patches/*/00*|wc -l
655

This includes some larger rewrites of subsystems, e.g. wininet-Cleanup

Some form of coordinated effort should probably be done to integrate
things back to wine.

Also, I sent two more or less trivial fixes towards wine-patches, I would
really encourage to send more obvious things directly to Wine itself.

Ciao, Marcus