[AppDB] Beef up the Application Rating Guidelines
tony_lambregts at telusplanet.net
tony_lambregts at telusplanet.net
Sat Jan 29 10:25:29 CST 2005
Francois Gouget wrote:
>
> I feel that the current 'Maintainers Ratings System Help' is awfully
> vague and needs to be beefed up. So I'm attaching a proposal in which I
> tried to keep the original spirit but make things more precise.
>
> * First I'd like to rename this page from
> Maintainers Ratings System Help
> to
> Maintainer's Application Rating Guidelines
> - I added 'Application' to the title because that's what is being
> rated, not the maintainers.
> - I removed 'System' because it does not bring anything.
> - And I changed 'Help' to 'Guidelines' because this page does not
> juse tries to help maintainers give a random rating to an application,
> it tries to define which rating an application can have depending on how
> it runs.
> - Finally once the old ratnig system is removed we can remove
> "Maintainer's" since there will be only one left.
>
> * I've also reversed the order of the medals, because it seems a more
> logical progression and can simplify the explanations: in order to get a
> Silver medal you must pass all the criterias for a Bronze medal, plus
> some new ones.
>
> * I still feel there's a huge gap between 'Garbage' and 'Bronze' and
> that it would be interesting to have statistics about the percentage of
> applications that fail to install, and those that install but crash on
> startup, both cases which are included in the Garbage category along
> with those that install and start up but are still not usable.
> (Chocolate and Tin medals?)
How about:
- "Also Ran" for those that install and start up but are still not usable.
and
- "Did Not Finish" for those that install but crash on startup.
These are at least slightly intuitive and stay in with the "Prize or award" motif.
--
Tony Lambregts
More information about the wine-devel
mailing list