>Its not the point of testing every random app there is. Such tests are useless, if they do not provide any precise error or in any other way show precisely any bug/deficiency in ROS. What >are those for? What is the point of passing report same as in my afforementioned example (AKA app doesnt work, nothing in debug log).

The error is quite precise. The app has just one functionality: "Click on the desktop to hide all windows". And the app doesnt work. So if you mix both statements (or if you just read the bugreport Title) you'll discover that the bug is: "ClickToDesktop is not hidding/unhidding the Windows in ReactOS".
About defining it as a "every random app", I disagree. This one is about message handling, and iirc, jimtabor is now quite focused in message handling. Even more, most of my yesterday bugreports are about keyboard message handling.So maybe these "random (opensource) apps" could be of any help for Jim. But of course you have tested the app before overreacting.Haven't you?

Now the interesting points:

>1. No precise error;
Disagree. I have been as precise as I can. Caemyr, maybe you can tell me if the bug is in "Desktop doesn't recive my mouse click so the app doesn't send the messages to minimize recursively the windows" or if the bug is "directly in Minimizing/Maximizing message handling"? I can't,so I prefer to not mislead the Dev letting him to decide where is the bug.

>2. No info regarding the app in gathered debug log;
There is no DebugLog as there isn't any new line in Putty, as I said in the bugreport.

>3. App is not of priority list (which includes major apps, as such would not be affected by points 1 and 2);

Could you point me to that "priority list"?Do you mean you prefer a bugreport of "MSWord2007 not installing" instead a bugreport of a small opensource app (or better said, a script) which tests 2 or 3  Win32 combined functionalities?

Evenmore, where is that 3rd point about "App is not of priority list" in the File bugs guideline?


Summing up: Invalid bugreports are those which doesn't follow the Wiki guidelines, not your "own" guidelines or your "own" priorities.

>To have such report fixed, one would first research the bug, something what you ommited, feeling content with simply stating that app doesnt work...
Could you pointed me where in "wiki" it's said that the bug should be "researched"?And what do you mean with "research"? Should I find which API is failing?Researching a bug is optionally if it is not then we can begin closing most of the bugreports as Invalid.

>Its not the first time i point out the quality of bugs reported by you, and my previous attempts to reason with you have failed.

Please show me my "Invalid" bugs until yesterday. Could you describe mi un-quality bugs?I can:
1)You TOLD me to modify "regressions" to "REGRESSION" in 7 or 8 bugreports titles so they can be found by the Wiki Regressions Buglist script. I DID the changes in most of them after your request, I just missed a couple (damn Bugzilla search) and you modify them. Is that a failed "attempt to reason"?

2)You TOLD me to modify "User32:msg regression" to "User32_winetest:msg". I DID in 7 or 8 bugreport titles too.I didn't change all because my Internet reliability, when I was able to reconnect I found that you have changed the missing ones.Thanks. Is that a failed "attempt to reason"?

Any other?Please links, not words.

>Please treat this as official warning from me then.

Official warning??Lol. No comments. To avoid a second one I have added a "Sir" in the greetings. But I am curious, what happens after the 2nd Official Caemyr warning?
Can I give you an Official warning because your overreacted offending email?


Yours faithfully,

Vicmarcal