Hi, On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 08:52:45PM -0600, Vitaliy Margolen wrote: > Dr J A Gow wrote: > > How to capture these 'lost' contributions is a difficult issue. Maybe a > > centralized repository for patches could be maintained separate from the > > main > > Wine tree and with a very loose method of acceptance (maybe just ensure > > that it > > is clearly indicated what the patch is for and what version it can be > > applied > > to). This way it would be very easy for a contributor to place a patch > > somewhere > > where it is easily accessed by the community. A developer with more time > > who is > > interested in it may pick it up and clean it up for inclusion in the tree, > > but > > at least the patch is available for others to use, saving re-invention of > > the wheel. > > > Why reinvent the wheel? If such people can spend their time chasing down the > problem > and developing a fix for it, they sure can open a bug in bugzilla, describe > theproblem > and attach a patch they made. How more simple can it be? > > No patches lost, no extra places to look for. And all the information > describing the > problem. Everything in one place.
And exactly this information should probably be stated in the wine-patches subscription welcome mail. "If for some reason the Wine patches you submit fail to get applied, then we'd appreciate you taking the effort of submitting your current patch as a new item at bugzilla to help us track your work properly until it's fully applied." Or, for improved visibility, even state this in the footer of every wine-patches mail sent (probably bad idea, though). Oh, and a DNS alias (or preferrably forwarder) bugzilla.winehq.org might be useful (after all it's quite common to have that site name, see e.g. bugzilla.kernel.org or bugzilla.mozilla.org etc.). Andreas -- GNU/Linux. It's not the software that's free, it's you.
