WineHQ should discourage the use of cracks

[Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes]

> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:31 AM, Vincent Povirk
>
> <madewokherd+d41d at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  Something like this might actually make more sense:
> >
> >  Garbage: No functionality, impossible to set up
> >  Bronze: Somewhat functional, may require hacks
> >  Silver: Mostly functional, requires hacks
> >  Gold: Mostly functional, does not require hacks
> >  Platinum: Fully functional, does not require hacks
> >
> >  This would give a fair amount of information about both the level of
> >  functionality and the difficulty, and it would mean anything that
> >  requires hacks cannot be rated Gold.
>
> That's a step in the right direction.  As long as we don't explicitly
> mention cracks, I'm ok with that.
> - Dan


I'm not sure if we should remove the option for 'fully functional, requires 
hacks'.  A lot of people come to the AppDB to find out how they can make 
their apps work, and are more interested in the end result as opposed to how 
to get there.  

It might not be a good idea, but we could always introduce a new rating so 
that we have

> >  Garbage: No functionality, impossible to set up
> >  Bronze: Somewhat functional, may require hacks
> >  Silver: Mostly functional, requires hacks
> >  Gold: Mostly functional, does not require hacks
>>   Ivory: Fully functional, requires hacks
> >  Platinum: Fully functional, does not require hacks


Not saying it's a good idea.

Otherwise, adding a 'difficulty' field sounds interesting.  This would allow 
users to easily avoid apps that require a really complicated work-around, 
such as patching and compiling Wine.  Then we could also add an option to 
turn on warnings if an app requires a crack, or we could censor it 
automatically based on GeoIP data.


Regards,

Alexander N. Sørnes