On Mon, 5 May 2003, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
On May 4, 2003 10:27 pm, Francois Gouget wrote:
[...]
wine-patches 'Report consisting solely of a patch'
I think this should be a keyword, 'patch', rather than a component.
It should die, for sure. Patches should be sent to wine-{patches,devel} for inclusion or discussion. I have patches submitted to Bugzilla, they have about 0 visibility. A much better way to do it is to submit the patch to one of the above mentioned lists, and add a link to the archived message. This way: -- You get the patch out there, to a much wider audience -- You can have discution threads about it via regular email -- You get to link it to the bug, if relevant.
Some patches will inevitably end up in bugzilla. So we'll need people to submit them to wine-devel/wine-patches but tagging the relevant bugs would really help tracking them.
- wine-help 'Basic support or configuration request'
[...]
Agreed. Let's nuke it.
Do you want to nuke the bugs or the wine-help component? If the former then it's ok to nuke that component but otherwise we'll need it.
- I still think it would be nice to be able to attach a bug to a
specific dll. I don't know if that means we should add a bunch of components or a bunch of keywords or find yet another mechanism. Similarly having keywords/components corresponding to the debug channels would be nice.
Maybe nice, but most likely overkill. Bugzilla is way too complicated already, half of it's features are most likely never used. You need a degree in Bugzilla to operate it properly, this would just make it even more complicated...
Well often I know a bug is in shell32, but what component should that go into? *That* requires a degree.
The problem is that our components don't have a one to one mapping with dlls and that in many cases it's hard to know where to attach a bug. This results in lots of bugs getting into the wrong category such as wine-binary, wine-programs or wine-misc, which then makes it harder for developpers to find bugs relevant to their area of expertise.