On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Francois Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com wrote:
The goal of the Wine tests is to document the Windows behavior that Windows applications expect.
Skipping a test because your VM is broken doesn't qualify as a documentation of Windows behaviour.
The VM is not broken so the skip is ok (thanks for not bringing anything new to the table: it means I don't have to update my answer which makes this simpler).
I don't think that you have resources and intention to have Windows VMs with all possible pre/post SP/hotfixes configurations.
I certainly intend to make it possible for Wine developers to run their tests on most significant Windows configurations and that includes each service pack and Internet Explorer version. It's not as resource intensive as you seem to think (*). Now that's different from the set of Windows configurations that every Wine patch will be run on. That will be a subset decided by the community.
By the way, you should really check out test.winehq.org one of these days. You'd see that I already run WineTest on 25 different Windows configurations, *every day*, on my desktop. These range from NT4 to Windows 7 (64-bit) and cover most service packs, Internet Explorer versions, and even some language / locale variations. I would really find it disappointing if the WineTestBot could not offer that kind of coverage to Wine developers.
Not so long ago that machine was also running the tests on 5 additional NT4 configurations, Windows 95, Windows 98 and Windows Millenium. It no longer does, not because of lack of 'resources' or 'intention', but because the Wine community is not interested in these.
Additionally that same desktop still runs WineTest on Linux (4 configurations), FreeBSD (2 VMs) and Solaris (3 VMs) daily. That should give you a better perspective on what's possible.
(*) http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31784