> I am trying to argue that the bug does not warrant closure, wine-devel does
> not seem like an appropriate venue for such a discussion.
It depends on the bug. The consensus seems to be that this bug is
invalid, and I'm inclined to agree. A better bug would be something
about Command and Conquer Red Alert 3 Beta and how it fails. The bug,
as you opened it, doesn't have enough details about the specific
failure you're trying to fix.
At the time I opened the bug that would not have done any good, the only thing I could have said at that time is that it failed on WinHttpOpen. After minimally implementing things I could now have added a more complete list if the bug were still open.
> Honestly, I believe that this problem illustrates the need for these kind of
> bugs - if I had found a bug for WinHttp in bugzilla assigned to Zac then I
> could easily contact him. I do not have time to monitor wine-devel in order
> keep track of what everyone is working on so that I can keep from stepping
> on people's toes.
If not stepping on someone's toes is your wish, is it too much to ask
that you ask on wine-devel? You don't have to read it on a regular
basis to post a question, and it's rather well known that Zac's been
working on WinHttp. We could have pointed you in the right direction.
While this is not a particularly efficient mechanism for solving these kinds of problems, I can do that in the future. Would you mind pointing me in the direction of Zac's patches?
--Juan