Re: [PATCH] Increased winsock2 maximum sockets
this mostdefinitaly has affected multiple server applications I use for the old WON.Net Backend servers, so you cant say this is a patch without any reason befind it On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 3:42 PM Marvin <testbot(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Thank you for your contribution to Wine!
This is an automated notification to let you know that your patch has been reviewed and its status set to "Rejected".
This means that the patch has been rejected by a reviewer. You should have received a mail explaining why it was rejected. You need to fix the issue and resend the patch, or if you are convinced that your patch is good as is, you should reply to the rejection message with your counterarguments.
If you do not understand the reason for this status, disagree with our assessment, or are simply not sure how to proceed next, please ask for clarification by replying to this email.
On 1/25/22 17:22, Benjamin Shefte wrote:
this mostdefinitaly has affected multiple server applications I use for the old WON.Net Backend servers, so you cant say this is a patch without any reason befind it
I wasn't claiming there's no reason behind it, just asking if there are any, for documentation's sake. The more salient problem with the patch is the lack of tests. It should be easy to prove this change's correctness.
I wasn't claiming there's no reason behind it, just asking if there are any, for documentation's sake
i see many patches going in without documentation (or patches falling of the list without documentation) so I can imagine why he sent in without documentation... . o Op wo 26 jan. 2022 om 00:44 schreef Zebediah Figura (she/her) < zfigura(a)codeweavers.com>:
On 1/25/22 17:22, Benjamin Shefte wrote:
this mostdefinitaly has affected multiple server applications I use for the old WON.Net Backend servers, so you cant say this is a patch without any reason befind it
I wasn't claiming there's no reason behind it, just asking if there are any, for documentation's sake.
The more salient problem with the patch is the lack of tests. It should be easy to prove this change's correctness.
My bad, had kind of a bad day yesterday so my responses may have been a bit short-tempered. I'll add a list of programs and documentations and possibly examples of things that I have used for the limit is too low for my purposes. On Tue, Jan 25, 2022, 6:07 PM Louis Lenders <xerox.xerox2000x(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I wasn't claiming there's no reason behind it, just asking if there are any, for documentation's sake
i see many patches going in without documentation (or patches falling of the list without documentation) so I can imagine why he sent in without documentation... .
o
Op wo 26 jan. 2022 om 00:44 schreef Zebediah Figura (she/her) < zfigura(a)codeweavers.com>:
On 1/25/22 17:22, Benjamin Shefte wrote:
this mostdefinitaly has affected multiple server applications I use for the old WON.Net Backend servers, so you cant say this is a patch without any reason befind it
I wasn't claiming there's no reason behind it, just asking if there are any, for documentation's sake.
The more salient problem with the patch is the lack of tests. It should be easy to prove this change's correctness.
participants (3)
-
Benjamin Shefte -
Louis Lenders -
Zebediah Figura (she/her)