Wine developer frustration (was Re: ntdll: Improve stub of NtQueryEaFile.)

Vincent Povirk madewokherd at
Wed Jun 17 13:41:54 CDT 2015

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Erich E. Hoover
<erich.e.hoover at> wrote:
> We would be open to having a separate product on WineHQ so that people
> can easily move a bug to being our responsibility.

My problem with a separate product is that it means you have separate
components as well, and thus a search for the "gdiplus" component
won't show those bugs. Personally, I want to see the bugs in the
components I'm interested in even if they may be specific to
wine-staging. For this reason, I would rather have a keyword (meaning:
might require wine-staging to reproduce).

Some developers may only be interested in bugs they know are in
winehq, or latest winehq. It can certainly be frustrating when you use
latest winehq as a baseline, and you find that the bug only happens in
earlier versions or some derivative. But I feel like retesting can be
(but doesn't always have to be) part of the debugging process, and
bugs can still be useful without that information.

More information about the wine-devel mailing list