Wine Staging patch submission

Vincent Povirk madewokherd at
Fri Oct 23 11:46:05 CDT 2015

I think the point here is that a patch in Staging is unlike a patch in
Development. Once accepted, it's not supposed to just sit there and
silently make things better, it's supposed to continue to develop
(and/or get wider testing) and eventually land in Development in some
form. It seems the Staging maintainers have settled on using Bugzilla
to track that.

We could perhaps have a process where patches for Staging are first
submitted to a mailing list, then when they're accepted into Staging a
bug is created for them. That would give us consistency in the
submission process, but it breaks up the discussion. And since patches
are going to be picked up from wine-patches, it sounds like we'll sort
of have that anyway (but with more flexibility for contributors)?

I think the only question here is whether submitting through bugzilla
as an intermediate step misses something important that we'd get from
the mailing list. If a patch is added to Staging, improved by others,
and eventually sent to wine-patches, it may end up without a sign-off
from the original author. Or, if we're picking up patches from
bugzilla, maybe there's a risk that the original author doesn't
understand they're making a contribution to Wine? I don't have a
position on whether these are real problems, just seems worth

I feel like a bugzilla keyword might be better than using the staging
product. Often, there's going to be an existing Wine bug that will
have any proposed patch attached to it, and I'm not sure it makes
sense to file a new bug just to bring the patch to the attention of
the Staging maintainers. Also, if the bug is in the Wine product, it
can use a Wine component, which may bring it to the attention of
people with an interest in that component.

More information about the wine-devel mailing list