AppDB: Rating / Patching

[Nathaniel Gray]

On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:03 AM, James Mckenzie
<jjmckenzie51 at earthlink.net> wrote:
> No, the appdb should not be touched.  Rosanne said it correctly, ordinary users are NOT going to take the time to build Wine, nor should they.   We can put in the bug report that the patch works and whether or not it has been submitted.  Sometimes a patch is to rough or a real hack that breaks other programs, but with refinement is acceptable and will be incorporated into Wine.  The appdb needs to stay as clean as it can.  Of course, you can always add a bug report to the appdb entry, add comments and let users decide what they want to do.  Rating a rogue patched Wine as Gold is very misleading.  We need to keep ratings to what is available for the ordinary, unknowing user (read nOOb.)

Ok, I can see that nobody agrees with me here.  I think the suggestion
helps newbies *and* experts by keeping them sorted out.  The situation
where some reports are against patched versions and others arent, and
you have to dig into the details to figure out which is which doesn't
serve anybody.  Excluding patched versions entirely is one way of
solving the problem, but it seems to me that you're going to have a
hard time stopping people from reporting results against patched
versions.  Binning all patched versions into "Bronze" isn't great,
since some of us *do* want to know if we can make an app work with a
patch, and in fact quite a few of us Linux users fall into that
category.  But anyway, I've made my argument and I'll drop it now.

Cheers,
-n8

-- 
Nathan Gray
http://www.n8gray.org/