On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Austin English <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:51 PM, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/24/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9484 > > > > > > > > > --- Comment #9 from Austin English <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-03-24 > > 12:43:54 --- > > > Can anyone test this in wine 0.9.58? Some other copy protections are > > working > > > better, and if this isn't working yet, we might want to delay it to > > wine 1.2... > > > > > > > What's the point of having a blocker list if we keep deferring those > > bugs? Granted not every bug in the list deserves a spot, but we need > > to knuckle down and get these bugs fixed. When we get closer to the > > release date, we can get a better idea of which bugs are not feasible > > to fix before the release. Until that point, this bug list needs to > > receive top priority. > > > > -- > > James Hawkins > > > > I was going through a few of the 1.0 bugs that haven't been tested in > a while. Since it has no demo, I can't personally test it, and was > trying to see if any progress has been made in the past few months (as > has been with SafeDisc). While it is certainly hard to tell if it can > be fixed by 1.0, having someone test it and see how much closer we are > to fixing it is the first step in figuring that out. >
No objection there. My point about deferring bugs stands though. -- James Hawkins
