My WineHQ menu structure proposal
igor at mlug.missouri.edu
Sun Nov 3 11:27:17 CST 2002
On Sunday 03 November 2002 11:11 am, Jeremy White wrote:
> > * The "Supported Applications" idea is a good one, and I've been
> > advocating it for a few days now. This should be a hand-maintained
> > list of apps what we have 'officially' tested, and know for a fact
> > that work decently in Wine. See the current efforts to come up with
> > the Gold list of apps supported under Wine.
> I actually think that we could have exactly one entry - and
> that it be called 'Supported Applications'. That's the link
> people will click on; it addresses their immediate question.
> Trying to be more semantically precise with the main menu
> link is a mistake, imo.
Agreed. "Supported Apps" makes sense and conveys the exact purpose of the app
database. "Application Progress Status" that someone suggested sounds weird
and is far worse than "Application Database". We don't need to be
semantically correct, these are people we are talking to, not a compiler.
> > * Minor nit, but I still don't like CVS under Downloads. First off,
> > nobody thinks about using CVS as a Download option. There is a big
> > semantical impedance mismatch here. CVS is viewed as a development
> > tool. Also people using CVS don't go to Download, and viceversa.
> > I think it's a mistake to group items based on their form/syntax,
> > rather than meaning/semantics. In this case, the grouping is based
> > on the fact that there are bits going across the wire, and I don't
> > feel it's a meaningful distinction for anyone.
> I disagree here. I don't think we should expound on CVS here, I'm
> just thinking a link to the detailed instructions under Development.
> What's the first thing a newbie gets told after reporting
> a problem: "Have you tried it against the CVS tip?"
Just having a link to the cvs instructions is good. It doesn't clutter stuff
up. How about separating stuff into three sections:
- source/binary packages (RPM/deb)
- source snapshot
You could have links in the first two and a link to the detailed instructions
in the third. Doesn't clutter stuff up and does not confuse newbies.
Something along the lines of "If you want to develop wine and you want the
bleeding edge stuff, click here for the cvs instructions".
> > I suggest we work off of your latest proposal, and suggest 'patches'
> > to it, if anyone feels there should be changes. But this does seem
> > to bring us closer to a universally accepted solution. Yay!
> I'm good with that. Double yay!
More information about the wine-devel