appdb rating inflation

[Jan Zerebecki]

On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 07:00:20PM -0800, Dan Kegel wrote:
> I'd like to change this to make it clear that cracks are a no-no for
> anything Silver and above, and make Platinum and Gold rather
> more rigorous:

I don't think that is helpful. What is more important:

to know that it works only with cosmetic problems after quite
some work(arounds)

or that it does not work at all without workarounds and to have
no information about how it works with workarounds?

> Platinum
> Platinum applications install normally and run flawlessly.
> No manual editing of files, no winecfg settings, no native DLLs, no 
> third-party
> install scripts, and no cracks are allowed for a Platinum rating.
> 
> Gold
> Gold applications install normally and run well.
> Some cosmetic problems may be present, but they should not be noticable
> to the average user.
> No manual editing of files, no winecfg settings, no native DLLs, no
> third-party install scripts, and no cracks are allowed for a Gold
> rating.

AFAIK Platinum was introduced because we wanted to have a rating
for "you can get it to work somehow with patches to wine and
other workarounds and only cosmetic problems remain" and one for
"works without any changes and has no problems on the usual
configurations".

This also means that a app that does not work at all with winenas
(or some of the other more obscure sound drivers) but has no
problems with e.g. winealsa should be able to be Platinum.



Jan