"Zachary Goldberg" zgs@seas.upenn.edu writes:
I think most of the participants in this thread thus far recognize the complexity of Wine and the difficulty of the task at hand. I do believe however, that Vitaliy's original arguement still stands. Are we working to make Wine 1.0 be the best at running applications that Wine has ever been? If so then reverting recent patches which break things is a good idea. If we're _only_ concerned about those 4 listed applications and those still work and the status of other regressions isn't as important then we continue and leave in the regressions.
The goal is to ship with as few bugs as possible, whether they are regressions or not doesn't matter for users affected by the bug. I see no evidence that Wine as of two months ago was so wonderfully stable that going back to it would magically yield a bug-free 1.0.
So yes, recent changes have caused regressions, just like about any other change in Wine. That's what code freeze is all about: try to fix the existing problems (including regressions) without introducing new ones. We've been in a code freeze for only a week now, I think it's a bit early to admit defeat and decide that we can't fix things without blindly reverting patches.