[v3 03/12] comctl32: Added basic implementation for task dialogs and add tests

[Sebastian Lackner]

On 10.03.2017 20:18, Fabian Maurer wrote:
>> We usually use winetest_interactive for that.
> Is that necessary if I replace the test with another in the next patch 
> anyways?

Sorry, I missed that it is only a workaround for unimplemented functionality.
It should be fine then. Nevertheless, it actually wouldn't hurt to add a
couple of interactive tests, too.  Having non-interactive tests is nice, but
they don't help to notice visual bugs.

> I figured it would be enough if I don't introduce a test fail, in case 
> of a bisect or something along the lines.
> 
>> Also, please try to send your changes in reasonable sized chunks (max 5-7)
>> in the future. Sending more patches at once only makes sense if they do not
>> depend on each other.
> I don't quite understand what you mean. You mean I sent too many patches at 
> once? But all those 12 patches depend on each other, together only they form 
> an implementation that could replace the current one.

Yes, you should send your patches in smaller chunks. Also, you shouldn't rely
on the assumption that all of your patches are applied at once. The patchset
should still make sense, even if each commit is applied separately. If it
doesn't, that would mean you have to reorder or merge them. As long as you
mark failing tests with todo_wine it is not a problem to have a temporary
state with "less features" than the original implementation though.

Best regards,
Sebastian