Wine 1.00 the AppDB and State of the Winehq website.

[NN]

In looking forward to the release of wine 1.0 I have a question about "Browse Applications by Rating" http://appdb.winehq.org/browse_by_rating.php

When adding test data you can only add reports on what looks like the last 6 releases? Eg wine versions 0.956 / 0.957 /0.958 /0.959 /0.960/0.961

Do these stat's on "Browse Applications by Rating" report this?
If not what does this actually report? Older versions if so how old? Can we have Change the reporting breakdown the ratings into something
more clearer, to aid people on the project? And have a truer snapshot of wine and the apps in the appdb?
It still allows you to keep the history of previous ratings for each

eg:
Rating Description No. Apps
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Platinum Applications that install and run out of the box 1410
Version Release Description Breakdown of test results
1.000 Stable (2008-06-06) 507
0.961 Developer Beta (2008-05-02) 500
0.960 Developer Alpha (2008-??-??) 300
0.959 Developer Alpha (2008-??-??) 100
0.958 Developer Alpha (2008-??-??) 100
0.957 Developer Alpha (2008-??-??) 100
Older Retesting of these applications against a recent version of wine is need (eg:preferably the most current ) 100
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gold Applications that work flawlessly with some DLL overrides, other settings or third party software. 1707
<etc..>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Silver Applications that work excellently for 'normal use' 1164
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bronze Applications that work but have some issues, even for 'normal use' 1042
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Garbage Applications that don't work as intended, there should be at least one bug report if an app gets this rating 2441
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I see it listing only the say the last two to four developer releases of wine (the oldest being rolled up in to the "Older"summary) and each stable release of wine staying on the list?
------
Question:
In each Application, if the previous rating say platinum in wine 0.960 then Bronze in wine 0.961 then shouldn't bronze be the status for the most current developer version of wine for the program? What happens when the stable release of wine comes out, will users only be expecting the application rating to reflect how it works with the stable release? "should'n't the current test only be shown"? based first on the version of wine then the date of the submission
-------
I am aware that currently the appdb database test for old version's of wine already and label the application with "Old test results" box

eg:
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.p ... n&iId=8683
---------------------
See:
http://wiki.winehq.org/AppdbInfo

http://wiki.winehq.org/appdbratingpage

Also:
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12956
Roderick Colenbrander comment's "A while ago there was a discussion at wine-devel about redoing the appdb rating
(I also posted a lot of bullets to the appdb rating page at the wiki).
Basically there is nu uniform rating method and apps I would rate lets say
silver would be rated platinum by others because they consider native dlls and
cracks fine. So far nothing has been done about it and personally I would
change this bug to redo the whole rating mechanism."
-----------------------------
Just some food for thought.

Going forward the website needs to be easier to maintain without going thru hoops to remove stale pages, by directing to wiki so it can be maintained?

See:
12900 enh P2 othe [email protected] UNCO Update links in "development" section to point to wiki if possible
12901 enh P2 othe [email protected] UNCO Update links in "about" section to point to wiki if possible
12903 enh P2 othe [email protected] UNCO Update links in "Support" section to point to wiki if possible
13003 enh P2 othe [email protected] UNCO Update to "Add Test Data" page remove reference to csv
12899 enh P5 othe [email protected] UNCO Add link to "WineHQ Menu" to "Wine Forums"

Sorry for the Brain dump,

Regards
Nathan

[chourmovs]

Wait and see but i can't believe old good result won't be kept, it's interesting for no one

[dimesio]

Basically there is nu uniform rating method and apps I would rate lets say
silver would be rated platinum by others because they consider native dlls and
cracks fine. So far nothing has been done about it and personally I would
change this bug to redo the whole rating mechanism."

IMO, this "bug" is in the users, not the AppDB, and there is little that can be done about it. These kinds of ratings are always subjective, no matter how precise you try to make them--e.g., "normal use" in Word 2003 for me does not involve the equation editor at all, but for someone who relies on that feature (which currently doesn't work), their rating of the app is going to be quite different than mine.

[mike.cloaked]

IMO, this "bug" is in the users, not the AppDB, and there is little that can be done about it. These kinds of ratings are always subjective, no matter how precise you try to make them--e.g., "normal use" in Word 2003 for me does not involve the equation editor at all, but for someone who relies on that feature (which currently doesn't work), their rating of the app is going to be quite different than mine.

In my case use of the equation editor is essential. I tried installing Office 2003 in 1.0 rc1 - and it installs OK... but the equation editor is broken - and this means for me that Word 2003 is totally non-functional for my purposes.

I will try in rc2 very soon but I am hoping this will be fixed soon and before final release (maybe with the help of people from CodeWeavers?)