Appdb thoughts

[Detlef Riekenberg]

Am Montag, den 13.02.2006, 21:48 -0800 schrieb Dan Kegel:

> 2) 
> I often do quick testing of apps for
> obvious bugs (like crashes) without
> really getting to know the app, and
> I don't feel qualified to say much about the
> app; I just want to link a bug to it.
I picked up your Dogfood-Challenge while waiting for
the Commit of my Patches.

My Idea: Use vlc to view the wineconf-videos.
I found several Issues about the Installer (fixme) and vlc (crash).

Filling AppDB with version 2.14 of NSIS (accepted today:
http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?versionId=4273) and vlc 0.8.4a (new
app, new version: still waiting for the AppDB-Maintainers) together with
the bugs for NSIS and comparing the App on wine and Windows need a lot
of time.
> But the app db gets upset unless I fill
> in all sorts of info about the app.
> And unless I'm willing to be the app db maintainer
> for an app,  that info is
> going to quickly get out of date.
> So I'd like a way to create an app db entry
> without filling in any info about the
> app besides a bug number.

IMHO, the requirements will prevent some People creating a
new AppDB-Entry, but the Quality of the Entries is much better
with the requirements.
(quickly out of date):
This is correct, but when you want to improve the AppDB and you see
2 similar, but "out of date" - Apps, which would you pick up:
- The Simple Version with only the Link to Bugzilla?
- The comfort Version which already has many Infos?


Think about a Wine Code-Freeze with a call to Improve the Content
of Bugzilla and the AppDB as main Target.
The chance for an AppDB-Entry with useful Content to get an update is
much higher than for the Simple Entry.

> 3) It'd be nice if, when entering bugs
> in bugzilla, the web interface let me enter
> an appdb app id somehow.   Not sure how to
> do that nicely.

I Start the BUG-Description with the AppDB-Link.

Changing bugzilla is the better way.


-- 
By By ...
      ... Detlef