Reece Dunn wrote: > On 13/02/2008, Jeff Zaroyko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Reece Dunn <msclrhd <at> googlemail.com> writes: >> >> > I am looking at how we can make winecfg more useful. I have already >> > supplied patches to allow importing a ubuntu human theme to work :). >> > So I am now looking at how to build on that. >> >> I think this could probably do with some consideration >> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6233 , it describes how the >> Applications tab does not belong among the other tabs because it should be >> higher up in the hierarchy of things. >> > > There are several bugs related to winecfg currently. Also, the Ubuntu > devs have some ideas on improvements to winecfg on their wiki, as well > as some ideas for command line access to winecfg, install/uninstall > and other functionality. > Great. One bug == one bugzilla entry. One enhancement == one bugzilla enhancement entry > Ideally, there should be a winecfg meta-bug, like what we have for 1.0 > and have the various enhancements grouped into relevant bugs. This > will allow attachments (like mockups to be added), as well as tracking > patches and ideas. > There is no metabug for Wine 1.0. There is a query that is run that shows bugs that should be closed/corrected before Wine 1.0 is released > I'll start setting this up, and raising the Ubuntu comments as > enhancements, to better track things and get the usability and > scriptability of wine configuration and management up to where they > should be. > > Again, one bug or one enhancement - one bugzilla entry. Some of the bugs/enhancements should be there before Wine 1.0 is released, some others can wait and others still may never be there. > Does anyone know how to set up the meta bug/group to track these? > > No. Metabugz are not desired for additional functionality. Their purpose should be only to track bugs found in a particular release candidate that will stop a product release. It is undesirable to have a metabug for a series of enhancements.
James