http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9787
--- Comment #299 from Bob Igo bob@igo.name 2008-11-23 13:32:02 --- (In reply to comment #297)
Essentially, I, a relative unknown, am telling someone who has been working on this a long time that something is broken. If a man came in off the street and said that your product is broken, you don't always take him in hand and say he is right.
If there's still doubt that there are errors in need of fixing, can't a regression test be used to prove this one way or the other? Run the test on the unpatched version, then compare with the results from the patched version.
This breaks a paradigm that the asynchronous queue was built upon. Thus the patch is considered wrong.
The wineserver is so poorly documented that I didn't know I was breaking a paradigm when I did it.
Do you think it would be worth it to submit a documentation patch that documents what the wineserver is actually doing, and not what it is designed to do? It might at least enable developers who know the undocumented paradigms to focus on a fix that works within wineserver's intended design.