[appdb] Applications working flawlessly using patched wine should be rated Gold

James Eder jimportal at gmail.com
Fri May 18 15:52:28 CDT 2012

IMO, AppDB should gather enough information form the user to assign
the rating automatically.  For example, answering "no" for "Installs?"
should automatically lower the rating.  "Runs?" might be a bit too is
a bit too ambiguous.  More over, the ratings should not be something
you have to click on a help page to figure out what they mean.

We should have a "Rating" section that asks a series of questions.
Application starts with 5 points and looses them:

--- Rating ---
    ( ) Yes
    ( ) No {-4}

  How well does the application work?
    ( ) Perfectly.  The application preforms the same as it would on Windows.
    ( ) Good. There are some minor functionality, visual appearance,
or performance issues {-1}
    ( ) Unusable. Crashes or is otherwise useless for the
application's intended purpose {-4}

  Does the application require workarounds (see below) for the above
level of functionality?
    ( ) No
    ( ) Yes, but only for minor functionality {-1}
    ( ) Yes, for major functionality {-2}

  What kinds of workaround are needed? Select all that apply: {These
are grayed out unless the user selects a "workaround" option above.
They need not effect the rating but serves to help the tester answer
the question above "right" answer for the above question.
Additionally it's nice information to have for users who read the
    [ ] Manual configuration such as editing registry settings,
configuration files, starting application with special parameters,
    [ ] Manual file copy from other Windows installs or installation media
    [ ] Installation of Windows native components (dll overrides,
winetricks, etc)
    [ ] Patched Wine
    [ ] Persistence. Wine frequently crashes due to some intermittent
failure but eventually if you keep trying you get what you need.
    [ ] Other (Explanation provided in other text fields)

  How difficult is it to use the workaround(s)?
    ( ) Trivial.  Anyone reading this review should be able to
implement them without difficulty even if they are inexperienced.
    ( ) Intermediate.  Requires some complex steps or third party
software (e.g. winetricks) {-1}
    ( ) Difficult.  Requires building Wine from source or in-depth
knowledge. {-3}

With the current system, rating is open to ambiguity and misuse.
Users often use it as an indicator of how much they like the
application or how excited they are that it works with Wine.  If we
generate the rating for them, then they have to lie (game the system)
to get a higher rating than what is deserved.

Of course this would require a bunch of work from someone and it may
be more invasive than desired.  Just my imaginative 2c at this point.

More information about the wine-devel mailing list