It is just me or is the entire Wine AppDB screwed up?
Why is it that people complain when no-cd fixes are used when a programs is rated platinum, yet when you need to set and use native dll's it's okay?
It's either one or the other, for example why is MS Office 2007 rated platinum for? You need native dll's and not wines versions to run it, yet in games that use secu-rom or other copy protections that are not implemented in WINE the highest it can achieve is a gold rating, because it requares a fixed exe both need extra files therefore both should be rated GOLD.
It's almost if the rating system is controlled by favoritism.
This diff needs fixing.
This diff needs fixing.
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 1:36 PM, telek <[email protected]> wrote:
are supposed to/should check them, but there are only a few of us to
do so.
--
-Austin
The ratings are done by users, not admins, so they vary widely. AdminsIt is just me or is the entire Wine AppDB screwed up?
Why is it that people complain when no-cd fixes are used when a programs is rated platinum, yet when you need to set and use native dll's it's okay?
It's either one or the other, for example why is MS Office 2007 rated platinum for? You need native dll's and not wines versions to run it, yet in games that use secu-rom or other copy protections that are not implemented in WINE the highest it can achieve is a gold rating, because it requares a fixed exe both need extra files therefore both should be rated GOLD.
It's almost has if the rating system is controlled by favoritism.
are supposed to/should check them, but there are only a few of us to
do so.
--
-Austin
Re: This diff needs fixing.
If it needs native dlls, the rating should not be platinum. You are right, there are many apps incorrectly rated platinum in the AppDB. Some of this is from people ignoring ratings definitions, and some of it is from people conducting limited tests and getting "platinum" results for the few things they tested.telek wrote:It is just me or is the entire Wine AppDB screwed up?
Why is it that people complain when no-cd fixes are used when a programs is rated platinum, yet when you need to set and use native dll's it's okay?
The AppDB entries for Office (all versions) are intended for the installer only. Office 2007 does not need any overrides to install in recent versions of Wine.It's either one or the other, for example why is MS Office 2007 rated platinum for? You need native dll's and not wines versions to run it,
As far as running the programs, there are separate AppDB entries for the individual apps included in Office. I don't think any are rated platinum.
Unfortunately, many people have ignored the "installer only" specification in reporting test results for Office. Complicating things even further is the fact that there are multiple "editions" (Basic, Pro, etc.) of Office within each major version, and few people have bothered to report which edition they tested. The result, I agree, is a confusing mess. I recently signed on as a super maintainer for Office precisely to try to straighten some of that out. Suggestions are welcome.
I don't see any favoritism in the AppDB; I do see a lot of inconsistency. That is inevitable; ratings are ultimately subjective.
Re: This diff needs fixing.
The only thing I can suggest is to do something like this:dimesio wrote:If it needs native dlls, the rating should not be platinum. You are right, there are many apps incorrectly rated platinum in the AppDB. Some of this is from people ignoring ratings definitions, and some of it is from people conducting limited tests and getting "platinum" results for the few things they tested.telek wrote:It is just me or is the entire Wine AppDB screwed up?
Why is it that people complain when no-cd fixes are used when a programs is rated platinum, yet when you need to set and use native dll's it's okay?
The AppDB entries for Office (all versions) are intended for the installer only. Office 2007 does not need any overrides to install in recent versions of Wine.It's either one or the other, for example why is MS Office 2007 rated platinum for? You need native dll's and not wines versions to run it,
As far as running the programs, there are separate AppDB entries for the individual apps included in Office. I don't think any are rated platinum.
Unfortunately, many people have ignored the "installer only" specification in reporting test results for Office. Complicating things even further is the fact that there are multiple "editions" (Basic, Pro, etc.) of Office within each major version, and few people have bothered to report which edition they tested. The result, I agree, is a confusing mess. I recently signed on as a super maintainer for Office precisely to try to straighten some of that out. Suggestions are welcome.
I don't see any favoritism in the AppDB; I do see a lot of inconsistency. That is inevitable; ratings are ultimately subjective.
Microsoft Office --> Year --> Version
So for example
Microsoft Office --> 2003 --> Enerprise --> (SP1), (SP2), etc
Microsoft Office --> 2003 --> Professional --> (SP1), (SP2), etc
Microsoft Office --> 2003 --> Basic --> (SP1), (SP2), etc
Same can be done for the rest of the versions.
I think this should clear things up.
As for the installer and actual program, I think the database page should look like something like this.
It should have an actual installation rating and a application rating on the actual page.
Something a long the lines likes this...
Installs in WINE: Platnium
Instructions on how to install the program in case it's not platnuim.
Runs in WINE: Gold
Instructions on how to run the program, patching wine, changing rending modes, using native dlls, etc.
I think any patches, no-cd fixes or any files that are not included with VANILLA WINE should be automatically rated gold or lower (depending on the programs functionality of course).
If it's possible I'd like to help out with this, I only have limited time but it's time I can use to fix things on here.
Re: This diff needs fixing.
Please join as SuperMaintainer or Maintainers. Your help would be appreciated.telek wrote: If it's possible I'd like to help out with this, I only have limited time but it's time I can use to fix things on here.
When submitting Test Results to the wine appdb should additional question be added asking did you use any native dll or dll overrides (for the installation and a the same question for "Runs" ) and based on this restrict the highest rating that can be chosen?
What should be done for existing tests already submitted for the office installers, should we modify the submissions and leave only information related to the office installer?
On the side panel of the Wine AppDB it mentions "Email your suggestions for improving the AppDB < appdb @ winehq.org >"
Re: This diff needs fixing.
I think that would be a great idea, because it would eliminate some of the possibilities of false ratings, but it should also include patches, cd fixes and native dll's, this way if they do use any of these the rating itself can no longer be any higher then gold.NN wrote:Please join as SuperMaintainer or Maintainers. Your help would be appreciated.telek wrote: If it's possible I'd like to help out with this, I only have limited time but it's time I can use to fix things on here.
When submitting Test Results to the wine appdb should additional question be added asking did you use any native dll or dll overrides (for the installation and a the same question for "Runs" ) and based on this restrict the highest rating that can be chosen?
I think for the existing submissions we should fix them up, so it's clear enough that the actual program and the installer have different different data that effects the overall rating, because the installer gets platinum doesn't mean the whole program does.What should be done for existing tests already submitted for the office installers, should we modify the submissions and leave only information related to the office installer?
On the side panel of the Wine AppDB it mentions "Email your suggestions for improving the AppDB < appdb @ winehq.org >"
Like if the installer gets platinum and the application itself only gets gold the rating should be gold because installing the application does you little good if you cant use it.
Re: This diff needs fixing.
I disagree. I think existing submissions should be left alone; there's really no way to tell what rating these people would have given the installer alone. My intention is to focus on new submissions; over time they will supplant the old ones, which will eventually be deleted as obsolete.telek wrote: I think for the existing submissions we should fix them up, so it's clear enough that the actual program and the installer have different different data that effects the overall rating, because the installer gets platinum doesn't mean the whole program does.
