This year's changes to the "Submitting Patches" page

[Andrew Eikum]

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 02:13:38AM +0200, Daniel Kamil Kozar wrote:
> Funny you should bring it up : I'm currently working on a patch to
> https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43270 . It's still in a
> incredibly early stage (but already makes the affected application
> work, which is nice) at which I wouldn't even consider making it an
> official submission, but I'd still love to hear comments about it (and
> have some questions myself anyway), especially seeing how I haven't
> ever done stuff in Wine before. Is sending "non-official" (i.e.
> without the [PATCH] prefix in the topic) patches for review to the
> mailing list acceptable? I don't think I've seen it mentioned in the
> wiki, since it only talks about sending "official" [PATCH]es.
> 

It's not forbidden, but generally that discussion is kept to bugzilla
or personal mails, I think. If you'd like some attention on a bug, you
could send a mail to wine-devel referencing it, email a relevant
person directly, or CC them on the bug. If you do send a RFC patch to
the ML, put "PATCH RFC" in the subject and don't include a sign-off.

Andrew

> On 25 July 2018 at 01:33, Zebediah Figura <z.figura12 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 01/07/18 09:01, Alex Henrie wrote:
> >
> >> - Clarify that Signed-off-by means that you think a patch is good
> >> enough to go into Wine (and not that you are obligated fix any
> >> regressions it may cause)
> >>
> >
> > I know that this is a terrible time to bring this up, since Alexandre is
> > on vacation, but I was just thinking about this and I have a concern I'd
> > like to know how to address. I am quite clearly not the best Wine
> > developer on the block, and, being aware of this, I'm not sure I
> > necessarily feel comfortable saying I am *confident* that many of my
> > patches—as I initially send them—are good enough to go into Wine. I
> > guess the system is sort of designed this way—Alexandre, and the other
> > reviewers, determine whether a patch is good enough, so it ultimately
> > kind of doesn't matter whether anyone else does. But it's been stated
> > explicitly—even at this last Wineconf—that the "standards" of the
> > submitter have direct bearing on their Julliard Rank, and it's obviously
> > in anyone's interest (especially us less proficient contributors) to
> > keep a high rank. And there are patches I send where I not only can't
> > guarantee I haven't made any accidental mistakes but am also generally
> > unsure that I've taken the right approach. This is a concern to me since
> > in my experience sending the patch as a RFC, or even trying to ask what
> > the right approach is, results in a response significantly less often
> > than I'd like. Not that I'm trying to accuse Alexandre or anyone else of
> > being unfairly unresponsive, but my point is that a patch with my
> > sign-off is more likely to get a review than one without, and of course
> > in the case where my approach does seem correct it can't be committed
> > without my sign-off.
> >
> > So, what should I do about this? Am I interpreting the meaning of a
> > sign-off too restrictively? Or is it just a matter of living with the
> > consequences of being a mediocre developer? Which is understandable if
> > that's the case; it's just unfortunate.
> >
> > ἔρρωσθε,
> > Zeb
> >
> >
> 
>