Sorry Mike but from an external point of view your argument sounds like ideology: 1) I dont understand why someone contributing to ReactOS would have his/her code rejected in all cases. Contributing to ReactOS does not necessary means the code is "dirty" reverse engineering.
2) The author stressed he did not develop this code by any reverse engineering.
Now I have two questions: How is it possible to consider rejecting the code without even looking or commenting the patches? Why do you base your argument on ideology and not on facts?
What is the point of having another Wine contributor to reimplement the exact same code, rediscover the exact same stuff?
The setupapi patches are perhaps incomplete, perhaps the format of the patches are not perfect but rejecting the patches because the author is @reactos.org seems uncorrect.
Best, Julien (wannabe wine hacker)