[AppDB] Entry for Everquest 2
ricardojdfilipe at gmail.com
Wed Mar 18 10:58:00 CDT 2009
as i said before, it was an uninformed decision, and yes, not enough time
was left for feedback from the maintainers.
we thought that appdb WOULD save all the data when moving, not only tests.
it serves as example for us for the future, unfortunatly with problems to
the EQ2 users. as i said before, sorry for that. at least it serves to not
repeat the mistake, we hope you understand.
a super maintainer would not be able to move the data to the new
application, only appdb admins have that power.
votes cannot be restored automatically, people will have to vote on the new
bug links are manually recoverable, searching bugzilla and linking should be
easy, i can do that if you feel you don't have time to.
2009/3/18 John Beaulieu <john.beaulieu at comcast.net>
> Ben Klein <shacklein <at> gmail.com> writes:
> > I just noticed that the entry for "Everquest II", the sequel to
> > "Everquest", is listed as version 2 under "Everquest" in AppDB. This
> > is incorrect, as the sequel is not a new version of the original game,
> > it is a new game. Can someone help me fix it? I'd delete the version
> > but there's quite a bit of test data there.
> > I've CC'd the version maintainers.
> I understand why this was fixed, but the method and timing were bad. When
> EverQuest II was removed as a version of EverQuest and moved to it's own
> entry in response to this message the only thing preserved was the test
> The votes for the application, the comments (with much needed info),
> notes (including howtos), and even the maintainers were removed. None of
> bugs reported for Everquest 2 that were linked to the app are linked
> anymore and
> do not appear on the new appdb page. After being forced to re-apply to be a
> maintainer once again and doing a lot of searching through cached google
> pages I
> was able to restore some of the lost info. Is there a way to link the bugs
> the appdb entry or not? Can the votes for the application be restored? Why
> this left to a super maintainer to correct instead? Why wasnt enough time
> allowed for input before an arbitrary change was made?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the wine-devel