2008/12/15 M.Kiesel <wine-de...@continuity.cjb.net>: > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Austin English wrote: > >> If I had a nickel for every times I've seen platinum and gold ratings for >> apps that had dozens of native dlls or complicated scripts to work around >> wine bugs, I'd be a much richer man. > > What about clarifying the wording on > http://appdb.winehq.org/help/?sTopic=maintainer_ratings > ? > > My suggestion for "Platinum": > "Application installs and runs flawlessly completely/at highest settings > 'out of the box'. No changes required in winecfg." > (add "completely/at highest settings")
I think it's fine as is. Some games won't run at highest settings on Windows, due to crappy video card, etc. > For "Gold": > "Application works completely/at highest settings flawlessly in the latest > Wine development release (no patches needed), possibly with DLL overrides, > other settings, or third party software." > (add same as above; add "latest Wine development release"; remove "*some* > DLL overrides) The ratings are done on a per version basis, so no need to stipulate the latest release. The patches and DLL comments I agree with. > I feel that games that are playable only at low settings shouldn't get Gold > or Platinum ratings at all. Other opinions? Depends on how they run in Windows on the same hardware ;-). > Austin: I think for apps that run completely with tweaks a Gold rating is > okay regardless of the number of tweaks involved; for the user it doesn't > matter really whether one or ten DLLs have to be overridden. I wouldn't go > as far as allowing patched Wine versions though. I don't disagree with that, though I see it quite a bit when approving programs in the AppDB (though I'm not the one usually doing it, I only go through the queue when I'm on the AppDB for other reasons). The main problem is when it get a _platinum_ rating. > I also suggest to hyperlink every mention of "Rating" in the browser with > that page. Otherwise it isn't completely clear (without searching) what the > individual ratings mean really. Agreed. > Who has the rights to change AppDB on that level? I'll send a patch tomorrow. If you don't see a change within a few days, remind me. -- -Austin
