Re: [PATCH v3 03/10] reg: Add system error printing function

[Indrek Altpere]

Seems that the patches have reached the magical "1 month" limit where they
disappear from the list silently.

Last I saw, your patchset contained about 8 or 10 patches?
Not sure if the best suggestion by official rules/guidelines, but perhaps it
would be possible to add the new stuff in multiple, smaller patchsets,
instead of one mega-patchset?

It would mean that reviewers don't have to dig around in hundreds of lines
of code changes that change a lot of functionality, makes it hard to keep
track of all of it and review it thoroughly.
Many big patchsets have gotten stalled like that: reviewer notices a few
things, notifies developer, developer makes the changes, sends the changed
full patchset again, reviewer checks full patchset again, finds more stuff
in next files (or even the same files), notifies developer and so on and so
on.
Sometimes multiple reviewers also cause havoc, because due to many coding
rules not being written down (http://wiki.winehq.org/SubmittingPatches
contains general and vague guidelines, but essentially 0 hard examples) and
each reviewer having a bit different viewpoint about what styling issues are
could-be or should-be, so sending a huge set will end up with responses
"here's about ~10 things wrong with your code" and like that after each
submit.

As I understand, someone correct me if I'm wrong, there is currently also no
active reg component maintainer, who would be able to review things quickly,
so smaller patchset would probably help things move along much faster?

About https://source.winehq.org/patches/data/107580 getting stalled, I have
no clue/opinion, does not seem to be overly complex?

Regards,
Indrek Altpere

[PATCH v3 03/10] reg: Add system error printing function

[Jonathan Vollebregt]

Stefan's reviewed the first 7 from my patchset: 
https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2014-November/105761.html

I was waiting for Hugh's patch to be committed so I could rebase (Or for 
mine to be committed) but if nothings going to happen I'll just resubmit.

On 12/12/2014 02:06 PM, Indrek Altpere wrote:
> Seems that the patches have reached the magical "1 month" limit where they
> disappear from the list silently.
>
> Last I saw, your patchset contained about 8 or 10 patches?
> Not sure if the best suggestion by official rules/guidelines, but perhaps it
> would be possible to add the new stuff in multiple, smaller patchsets,
> instead of one mega-patchset?
>
> It would mean that reviewers don't have to dig around in hundreds of lines
> of code changes that change a lot of functionality, makes it hard to keep
> track of all of it and review it thoroughly.
> Many big patchsets have gotten stalled like that: reviewer notices a few
> things, notifies developer, developer makes the changes, sends the changed
> full patchset again, reviewer checks full patchset again, finds more stuff
> in next files (or even the same files), notifies developer and so on and so
> on.
> Sometimes multiple reviewers also cause havoc, because due to many coding
> rules not being written down (http://wiki.winehq.org/SubmittingPatches
> contains general and vague guidelines, but essentially 0 hard examples) and
> each reviewer having a bit different viewpoint about what styling issues are
> could-be or should-be, so sending a huge set will end up with responses
> "here's about ~10 things wrong with your code" and like that after each
> submit.
>
> As I understand, someone correct me if I'm wrong, there is currently also no
> active reg component maintainer, who would be able to review things quickly,
> so smaller patchset would probably help things move along much faster?
>
> About https://source.winehq.org/patches/data/107580 getting stalled, I have
> no clue/opinion, does not seem to be overly complex?
>
> Regards,
> Indrek Altpere

[PATCH v3 03/10] reg: Add system error printing function

[Hugh McMaster]

On Friday, 12 Dec 2014 14:43:40 +0100, Jonathan Vollebregt wrote:
> Stefan's reviewed the first 7 from my patchset: 
> https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2014-November/105761.html
>
> I was waiting for Hugh's patch to be committed so I could rebase (Or for 
> mine to be committed) but if nothings going to happen I'll just resubmit.

Definitely resubmit your patches.