[Bug 15419] New: Test Data reports should include wine stable versions (i.e. 1.0, 1.2...) and not just recent betas
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Summary: Test Data reports should include wine stable versions (i.e. 1.0, 1.2...) and not just recent betas Product: WineHQ Apps Database Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: appdb-unknown AssignedTo: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org ReportedBy: milest3g(a)gmail.com For AppDB test data to be usefull to users, and since we know have stable wine releases, "Add Test Data" page should list wine 1.0 as a Tested release, and not just list 1.1.0 to 1.1.5 (for example), since corporate users and users looking for stability will be sticking to 1.0 for a long time. It should be the same for future stable releases like 1.2 - but those should not supersede 1.0 since some users/distributions might keep 1.0 for a long time. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Jan Hoogenraad <jan-winehq(a)hoogenraad.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jan-winehq(a)hoogenraad.net --- Comment #1 from Jan Hoogenraad <jan-winehq(a)hoogenraad.net> 2008-10-04 09:59:29 --- Above comment also goes for ordinary users using plain-vanilla distributions (like Ubuntu 8.04). -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Jeff Zaroyko <jeffz(a)jeffz.name> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tedhansen(a)sasktel.net --- Comment #2 from Jeff Zaroyko <jeffz(a)jeffz.name> 2008-12-18 18:59:08 --- *** Bug 16562 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dimesio(a)earthlink.net --- Comment #3 from Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net> 2008-12-18 23:19:40 --- 1.0.1 is already in the list of versions for adding test data. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #4 from Jeff Zaroyko <jeffz(a)jeffz.name> 2008-12-18 23:45:16 --- (In reply to comment #3)
1.0.1 is already in the list of versions for adding test data.
It'll disappear after 2 more versions are released since at every release, we add the new version into the AppDB automatically so users can select it the instant the announcement is made. I like to think that the AppDB represents the bleeding edge and I'm find with the current behavior. A lot of bugs are fixed in beta releases which means that some apps go from not working at all to working quite well. Ofcourse anyone is free to get a copy of the AppDB code and propose a change by generating a patch. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #5 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 00:17:55 --- It's a WONTFIX as far as I'm concerned. Old test results will still be there, but if someone can't submit new test results for a 6 month old release, I don't think that it's that big of a deal... If someone's that worried about it, source is at: http://source.winehq.org/git/appdb.git/ So feel free to implement it. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #6 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 08:05:28 --- I think you're misunderstanding the reason for this bug report. The purpose isn't to make life easier for tester - it's to make life easier for our users. Anybody tester can use the last unstable version, there's no feat there. Providing useful information for our users means we also provide test data for the version they're using, which for 99% of them will be one of the stable versions, since distributions only offer stable releases in their repositories. For the sake of our users, we're happy to downgrade temporarily and test applications in an older, but stable version. Moreover, since unstable release sometimes break support, it is a service to our users that we can check and tell them that the stable version runs their application fine. Now if for any philosophical reason we take the stance of disregarding our userbase, why do we provide stable releases at all? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #7 from Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net> 2008-12-19 08:32:42 --- (In reply to comment #6)
versions, since distributions only offer stable releases in their repositories.
Ubuntu and openSUSE only offer the latest development release in their Wine repositories. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #8 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 10:57:43 ---
Ubuntu and openSUSE only offer the latest development release in their Wine repositories.
http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=wine&searchon=names&suite=all&sec... I wonder how you could have imagine they'd submit their user to unstable versions? Hardy is supported for 3 years, that's still 2 years and a half. Intrepid is going to be supported for 18 month, jaunty will be the same (and it's not even released). Thing is, for wine developers there's already bugzilla. AppDB is for users, and most of them are using the stable releases. Breakage happens between different unstable releases, and a distribution that pushes new unstable packages every two weeks would seriously need to rethink it's goal. If you consider wine as a glorified xmame, that would be ok. Please bear in mind it's also use in businesses and for professional applications. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #9 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 11:15:47 --- (In reply to comment #6)
I think you're misunderstanding the reason for this bug report.
The purpose isn't to make life easier for tester - it's to make life easier for our users.
Understandable.
Anybody tester can use the last unstable version, there's no feat there. Providing useful information for our users means we also provide test data for the version they're using, which for 99% of them will be one of the stable versions, since distributions only offer stable releases in their repositories.
No. Your metric are highly skewed. Many users are building from source or from unofficial/semiofficial repositories, with unstable wine. I'm not trying to be pompous or off putting. The source is there if someone wants to patch it to always include 1.0.1. I just don't think that's a worthy goal, as it would encourage people to stick to stable, and never test unstable. When a new stable is released, and their app is broken, they'll be surprised, but how could it have been fixed if a bug was never filed. The first thing we do when a bug is filed on 1.0.1 is ask them to upgrade to unstable... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #10 from Ted Hansen <tedhansen(a)sasktel.net> 2008-12-19 11:20:23 --- It is not clear what this original bug request is but it appears to be that the reporter wants test results for the latest stable version to be acceptable. Is this not the current practice? In reply to comment #2: "Bug 16562 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug." This request is somewhat different. The current list of acceptable versions is 1.0.1 (current stable) but then only the latest few betas are listed. There is a substantial gap from 1.0.1 to 1.1.6. The newest versions in the Debian repository is 1.1.1; which means that anyone with a Debian system must either downgrade their system to 1.0.1 or else go to sources outside of the Debian repository in order to be allowed to submit an application test report. The logic of this escapes me. If a test result using 1.0.1 is acceptable and a test result using 1.1.6 is acceptable, why is a test result using 1.1.1 (which is clearly in between these two versions) not acceptable? Suggested solution...accept results for the current stable version and anything newer. Isn't the primary purpose to create a database of as many apps as possible so that a user will have some information as to how well an app will run under wine? Restricting the acceptable wine test versions only detracts from this. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #11 from Ted Hansen <tedhansen(a)sasktel.net> 2008-12-19 11:31:32 --- In reply to Comment #9 From Austin English [quote] When a new stable is released, and their app is broken, they'll be surprised, but how could it have been fixed if a bug was never filed. The first thing we do when a bug is filed on 1.0.1 is ask them to upgrade to unstable...[/quote] But this bug is not about reporting a bug (to bugzilla), it is about reporting test results to the App database. Users should not have to upgrade their system to report test results to the Db. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #12 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 11:34:52 ---
No. Your metric are highly skewed. Many users are building from source or from unofficial/semiofficial repositories, with unstable wine.
Last number I had for Ubuntu was that 10% of the user had wine installed. That's close to a million (800000 if somebody wants to be pompous), and there's not many chances they're all building from git or even touched theyr /etc/apt/source.list (since even that is considered as hard by most users on the Ubuntu's forums). Of course, the numbers are reversed if you only consider those that contribute to AppDB - but that's what we're here for. However, the majority of users are running stable releases.
I just don't think that's a worthy goal, as it would encourage people to stick to stable, and never test unstable. When a new stable is released, and their app is broken, they'll be surprised, but how could it have been fixed if a bug was never filed.
People that fill test data don't do it for bragging right. If we maintain apps and test them with each unstable release, it's not because we can't fill test data for stable ones. Assuming that we'd stop doing so if we could also fill test data for stable release isn't just pompous, it's insulting.
When a new stable is released, and their app is broken, they'll be surprised, but how could it have been fixed if a bug was never filed. The first thing we do when a bug is filed on 1.0.1 is ask them to upgrade to unstable...
It's a different conception of treating our users. Do we force them to be beta testers for the "greater good", knowing that most won't bother learning to use bugzilla and fill bug reports, or do we consider them as users and rely on the ones that would have volunteered to be tester anyway?
The source is there if someone wants to patch it to always include 1.0.1.
That's oh so nice. However, whoever's going to learn how to do that might as well learn C, fix all the remaining bugs in wine and be done with. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #13 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2008-12-19 11:36:38 --- (In reply to comment #10)
The newest versions in the Debian repository is 1.1.1 This is not Wine's problem. Take that to Debian packager.
Suggested solution...accept results for the current stable version and anything newer. No. There were reasons for this. All test results for such old versions are useless.
-- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #14 from Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net> 2008-12-19 11:37:23 --- (In reply to comment #8)
I wonder how you could have imagine they'd submit their user to unstable versions?
http://en.opensuse.org/Wine#Repositories http://www.winehq.org/download/deb IMO, very few users, even inexperienced ones, limit themselves to the packages their distro shipped with. But even if they do, that has nothing to do with accepting new test results for the "stable" release of Wine indefinitely. If I understand comment #4 correctly, whenever there is a new "stable" release it will automatically be added to the list of versions for which test results are accepted, and will stay on the list for 12 weeks. That seems to me to be ample time for anyone to add test results. I agree that test results for the most recent stable release should not be deleted, even if they are old compared to the development releases, but I don't see anyone doing that anyway. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #15 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2008-12-19 11:41:43 --- As of today AppDB already lists the following versions: 1.1.10 1.1.9 1.1.8 1.1.7 1.0.1 1.1.6 What more do you need? 1.0 was superseded by 1.0.1. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #16 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 11:46:26 --- The fact that AppDB now offers 1.0.1 has already been answered in this thread, but since the author of comments #3 and #7 is both uninformed and misleading, there's a quick recap of the reason for the bug : Yes, at the moment 1.0.1 is a choice because it has been release recently (it's a bug fix release of the stable version, which also prove this stable version is still supported). Like 1.0.0, 1.0.1 will soon disappear from the choices, even if 1.2.0 isn't out yet. I didn't check for OpenSuse, but as i explained in a previous post, Ubuntu is only offering the stable version in the repositories, even for Jaunty which is still in development. As for other comments showing no concerns for our users, there's not much that can be said short of turning that into a flamewar. It's an opinion that has been advocated for long by a fraction of thr Linux community, but please bear in mind other distributions and people don't agree. The result is that an important number of our users don't consider Wine as a toy. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #17 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 12:00:10 --- In response to Comment #13 From Vitaliy Margolen
Suggested solution...accept results for the current stable version and anything newer. No. There were reasons for this. All test results for such old versions are useless.
I've already explained why they aren't useless for our users. As for Wine developers, we perfectly understand they're useless for them, and already only fill bugs when testing with the last release. Where is the problem? In response to Comment #14 From Rosanne DiMesio
If I understand comment #4 correctly, whenever there is a new "stable" release it will automatically be added to the list of versions for which test results are accepted, and will stay on the list for 12 weeks. That seems to me to be ample time for anyone to add test results.
Sometimes you pick up an application that has been droped for a long time and has not received test since 0.9.XX. In this case I'd like to do a good job and not only submit test data useful to a fringe of our users, but also to those that aren't knowledgeable enough or willing to use different repositories. I also explained why some people would rather not risk being unable to use an application in the event a newer wine release breaks things. You're not in that position, I'm not either, that doesn't prevents me from understanding other people's situation. I also note you haven't acknowledged that at least Ubuntu only ships stable wine packages in their repositories. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #18 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2008-12-19 12:02:42 --- You still failed to clearly state what you want. No 1.0.0 will NOT disappear from the list because it's latest stable release. Get your facts straight before asking for something. Closing wontfix. There is nothing to fix. AppDB already lists latest stable version as an option for submitting test results. All older versions were removed from there for number of reasons. _All old_ test results are still available for every application and are not automatically removed. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #19 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2008-12-19 12:03:27 --- Closing. Your arguments are not enough to keep old versions around. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #20 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 12:03:52 --- (In reply to comment #12)
It's a different conception of treating our users. Do we force them to be beta testers for the "greater good", knowing that most won't bother learning to use bugzilla and fill bug reports, or do we consider them as users and rely on the ones that would have volunteered to be tester anyway?
If they're bothering to use AppDB, they're already in the minority of wine users, and bugzilla is not that much more of a step. I'm not saying we shouldn't have 1.0.1 in the list, but it's not that _big_ of a priority. Fixing bugs in newer wine releases is, which is why you won't find many people here worried about it.
The source is there if someone wants to patch it to always include 1.0.1.
That's oh so nice. However, whoever's going to learn how to do that might as well learn C, fix all the remaining bugs in wine and be done with.
PHP is easier than C to pick up. This is an open source project, not a paid for one. You can't expect someone to fix every whim you have, when you have just as much capability as the next person. If you or anyone else adds it, it'd be helpful to differentiate 1.0.1 as stable and the rest as unstable. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #21 from Ted Hansen <tedhansen(a)sasktel.net> 2008-12-19 12:04:11 --- (In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #10)
The newest versions in the Debian repository is 1.1.1 This is not Wine's problem. Take that to Debian packager.
Suggested solution...accept results for the current stable version and anything newer. No. There were reasons for this. All test results for such old versions are useless.
Not so. Please tell me what is useless about this listing http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=10968&iTestingI... It tells me, THE USER, that this application will probably work with any wine version from 0.9.51 to 1.1.10. The latest test is done with the latest beta, true, but the results would be equally useful to the user if done with 1.1.1. The AppDb should be for information for users or potential users. Use Bugzilla for tracking bugs and troubleshooting. It is appropriate to demand the latest beta in Bugzilla but in the AppDb it is not. Why do you not want test results added to the AppDb? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #22 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 12:59:11 --- (In reply to comment #18)
You still failed to clearly state what you want. No 1.0.0 will NOT disappear from the list because it's latest stable release. Get your facts straight before asking for something.
Closing wontfix.
There is nothing to fix. AppDB already lists latest stable version as an option for submitting test results. All older versions were removed from there for number of reasons. _All old_ test results are still available for every application and are not automatically removed.
At the time the bug was opened 1.0.1 had not been released and the only stable version (1.0.0) was not offered as a choice. Please consider the facts before saying that "AppDB already lists latest stable version as an option for submitting test results" since it was definitely not the case (else why would I have submitted the bug?). Either this behaviour has changed, and this is a "Fix released" or, as Austin English explained, 1.0.1 might not be offered as a choice before 1.2 (or 1.0.X) is released. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #23 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 13:06:08 --- (In reply to comment #21)
The AppDb should be for information for users or potential users. Use Bugzilla for tracking bugs and troubleshooting. It is appropriate to demand the latest beta in Bugzilla but in the AppDb it is not.
Agreed.
Why do you not want test results added to the AppDb?
We do. The problem is with people adding old versions of wine when there are newer ones to test (this was done before a stable release was made). Now that there's a stable release, it's arguable that we should always include the latest stable release in the list of versions in the AppDB. I'm not sure if we do or not, and the discussion has not made this clear. If we do, then there is no bug. If we don't, we should. Other than that, all this discussion is doing is causing a flame war. The reason we don't want old results is that they can be misleading. While valuable for apps that have regressed (they let users know that version X works, which is all they care about), it can give a false impression of wine (for better or worse, typically worse). If someone wants to submit test results, it needs to be done with the latest version, and bugs filed for any problems. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #24 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 13:07:31 --- (In reply to comment #20)
I'm not saying we shouldn't have 1.0.1 in the list, but it's not that _big_ of a priority.
Then why bother posting to this bug, or why mark it as "Won't Fix" if you're saying you're not against it?
You can't expect someone to fix every whim you have, when you have just as much capability as the next person.
I'm submitting a _bug_ _report_, not expecting someone to fix a "whim". What's the problem, are you telling us the wine project doesn't want App maintainers or Test submitters to submit bugs? That should be mentioned on the main page, because I'm sure this bug comments are going to interest a lot of people, who are also spending their time improving Wine the way they can, but might as well support another project if Wine developers tell them that they should never fill bug reports if they can't also fix the bug.
If you or anyone else adds it, it'd be helpful to differentiate 1.0.1 as stable and the rest as unstable.
As long as the bug is "Won't Fix", it means whatever fix one proposes won't be accepted. Why not leave the bug open then? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #25 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2008-12-19 13:58:32 --- (In reply to comment #22)
At the time the bug was opened 1.0.1 had not been released and the only stable version (1.0.0) was not offered as a choice. Then it was fixed since then. If you want I can change resolution to FIXED.
Regardless, the AppDB change was made to encourage people to use latest available Wine version(s). Having someone use 1/2+ year old or known broken version and submit test results that this app or that app doesn't work doesn't really help. Considering those versions will not be fixed. One of the main reason for this was Ubuntu's broken 0.9.46 version which was part of the Ubuntu release. It really was broken (both upstream and downstream). And yet many people were using it and submitting bogus test results. Again keep in mind that old test results are still there and are not being automatically removed. Unless submitters or maintainers decide to do that for some reason. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #26 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 14:29:40 --- (In reply to comment #25)
(In reply to comment #22)
At the time the bug was opened 1.0.1 had not been released and the only stable version (1.0.0) was not offered as a choice. Then it was fixed since then. If you want I can change resolution to FIXED.
You mean you, Rosanne DiMesio and Austin English posted in this thread without bothering reading the bugs and the comments? Whatever, the disregard for our users you 3 people showed in your comments isn't something I'm happy to associate with. Sadly I already spend days trying to run applications in order to write HowTo and useful test data for users, and what's lost is lost. I'm pulling out. Howto, test data and apps I maintain. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |UNCONFIRMED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #27 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 14:48:30 --- (In reply to comment #24)
(In reply to comment #20)
I'm not saying we shouldn't have 1.0.1 in the list, but it's not that _big_ of a priority.
Then why bother posting to this bug, or why mark it as "Won't Fix" if you're saying you're not against it?
I was not the one to mark it WONTFIX. Reopening. I think we need to leave 1.0.1 and mark it as stable. We may already do this, but the discussion doesn't make this clear. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #28 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 14:49:14 --- (In reply to comment #26)
(In reply to comment #25)
(In reply to comment #22)
At the time the bug was opened 1.0.1 had not been released and the only stable version (1.0.0) was not offered as a choice. Then it was fixed since then. If you want I can change resolution to FIXED.
You mean you, Rosanne DiMesio and Austin English posted in this thread without bothering reading the bugs and the comments?
I read all the comments, fwiw. Keep in mind and Rosanne and I are two of the AppDB admins, so we're well aware of problems in the AppDB. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #29 from t3g <milest3g(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 14:54:03 --- As I've said, I'm already pulling out. The howto I wrote and the test data took enough tims that I don't want to do that again for such a project (I already contribute to other open source project that consider their users in a sane wayn, not only as beta testers, and from what I read on Wine mailing list I was mistaken thinking it was also the case for the Wine project). -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 nathan.n <saturn_systems(a)yahoo.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |saturn_systems(a)yahoo.com -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #30 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 15:49:26 --- (In reply to comment #29)
As I've said, I'm already pulling out. The howto I wrote and the test data took enough tims that I don't want to do that again for such a project (I already contribute to other open source project that consider their users in a sane wayn, not only as beta testers, and from what I read on Wine mailing list I was mistaken thinking it was also the case for the Wine project).
You're free to do as you please. Wine is a very complex application, with constant changes and improvements. What doesn't work in Wine one day, works great the next. As a result, old test results and information is not very useful for Wine. We definitely care about users, but that said, our main focus is on getting Win32 API better and more fully implemented, not holding users's hands to ensure their 6 month old version of Wine works great. We move at a _very_ rapid pace, and if users don't wish to keep up, that's fine, but they can't expect us to hold back as a result. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #31 from Ted Hansen <tedhansen(a)sasktel.net> 2008-12-19 16:12:25 --- (In reply to comment #27)
Reopening. I think we need to leave 1.0.1 and mark it as stable. We may already do this, but the discussion doesn't make this clear.
One more time...would not establishing the practise of accepting test results using the current stable (whatever version it be at the time) or anything newer in the AppDb (not in Bugzilla) solve this? In reply to Comment #25 From Vitaliy Margolen 2008-12-19 13:58:32
Regardless, the AppDB change was made to encourage people to use latest available Wine version(s). Having someone use 1/2+ year old or known broken version and submit test results that this app or that app doesn't work >doesn't really help.
What if the test results are good...ie the app does work? Then not accepting the test results just means that there is no information at all for the potential user. If the results indicate problems, then the user/tester should be encouraged to upgrade but if all is well there should be no need for the user to have to upgrade (or downgrade to stable) to "fix" something which is not broken.
Considering those versions will not be fixed....
The purpose of the AppDb should be to inform potential users of how an app may be expected to perform under wine, not to inform developers of bugs in wine that need to be addressed. That is for Bugzilla, where it IS appropriate to demand testing with the latest beta. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #32 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2008-12-19 16:47:38 --- (In reply to comment #31)
(In reply to comment #27)
Reopening. I think we need to leave 1.0.1 and mark it as stable. We may already do this, but the discussion doesn't make this clear.
One more time...would not establishing the practise of accepting test results using the current stable (whatever version it be at the time) or anything newer in the AppDb (not in Bugzilla) solve this?
I agree with keeping the latest stable version, but NOT the versions in between. We want the latest results in wine, be it from the stable branch or the unstable branch. If distros are shipping the stable branch, fine. If they're shipping unstable, they should be shipping recent versions, not shipping 4 month old versions and calling it 'new'.
In reply to Comment #25 From Vitaliy Margolen 2008-12-19 13:58:32
Regardless, the AppDB change was made to encourage people to use latest available Wine version(s). Having someone use 1/2+ year old or known broken version and submit test results that this app or that app doesn't work >doesn't really help.
What if the test results are good...ie the app does work? Then not accepting the test results just means that there is no information at all for the potential user.
If the results indicate problems, then the user/tester should be encouraged to upgrade but if all is well there should be no need for the user to have to upgrade (or downgrade to stable) to "fix" something which is not broken.
Considering those versions will not be fixed....
The purpose of the AppDb should be to inform potential users of how an app may be expected to perform under wine, not to inform developers of bugs in wine that need to be addressed. That is for Bugzilla, where it IS appropriate to demand testing with the latest beta.
If the version tested is relatively recent at the time, it'll be accepted and stay there for a while. E.g., if you tested 1.1.1 when it was new and submitted results, they'd still be there. But if you wanted to do so now, there'd be little point. It's not a stable release, and it's really outdated. Upgrade to 1.1.10 and submit your tests. Bugzilla is not the appropriate place for a discussion. If you'd like to debate this with me personally, feel free to e-mail me. Otherwise, wine-devel would be more appropriate. Long story short, in my view, for versions in AppDB we should have: Unstable - Latest 5 or 6 releases, in descending order. Stable - Latest release (1.0.1 in this case, 1.2.0 whenever that is) Other versions should NOT be listed for NEW submissions. Any old test data, of course, will remain, unless deleted by maintainers or admins. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dank(a)kegel.com Severity|enhancement |normal Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #33 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2009-03-13 08:23:09 --- This is still a problem. You can't currently add test results for 1.0.1, it's not in the list at all. And users are annoyed: http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=15545 Given that 90% of our users just install what the distro comes with, and 90% of the distros just ship our most recent stable release, it seems quite clear to me that not including the most stable release in the appdb is shooting ourselves in the foot. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 John Pye <john(a)curioussymbols.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |john(a)curioussymbols.com --- Comment #34 from John Pye <john(a)curioussymbols.com> 2009-04-17 21:52:39 --- As of today, AppDB *does not* list Wine version 1.0.1, even though the page http://winehq.org/download/deb states that 1.0.1 is the current recommended stable version. I think that AppDB should accept bug reports for all current releases of major linux distributions such as Ubuntu (8.10 currently), because this is how most of your users come to you! -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk --- Comment #35 from Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> 2009-05-27 14:34:08 --- *** Bug 18653 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #36 from Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> 2009-05-27 14:36:26 --- I'm rejecting a lot of test results.... users aren't happy. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #37 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2009-05-27 14:55:14 --- OK, where's the appdb source code? Let's fix it ourselves. Lessee... http://source.winehq.org/git/appdb.git/ Could somebody have a go? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #38 from Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> 2009-05-27 15:00:08 --- I tried, couldn't find the specific code. Perhaps the data is held in a data file, not in the source? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #39 from Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> 2009-05-29 07:27:41 --- It definitely looks like the data is stored in the MySQL database. Someone with root access would have to make the changes. I don't think admins have the relevant access... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #40 from Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net> 2009-05-29 11:13:59 --- I think the AppDB gets the versions from bugzilla and limits them to the last 6. At least (if I'm reading things correctly), that's how it's done for searches filtered by Wine version tested: http://source.winehq.org/git/appdb.git/?a=commitdiff;h=d98e38e3059bab7c8d5ee... My guess is that it does something similar for the list generated for test submissions, but I haven't been able to find exactly where. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #41 from Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> 2009-05-29 12:58:21 --- Assuming the Wine versions are entered into the DB, then the code you've found there should be the actual process that does it. If so, does anyone know PHP? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #42 from Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> 2009-06-10 06:04:15 --- Created an attachment (id=21714) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=21714) array_insert patch There's no way I can know if this works without it being tested. I also have no experience in PHP, and this is what I've managed to pick up just this morning! Need someone with PHP knowledge to check it, as it's probably wrong. It's probably a good idea to start a thread in wine-devel about this (so I will). -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |source Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #43 from Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> 2009-06-12 15:14:35 --- Alexander has fixed it. :) http://source.winehq.org/git/appdb.git?a=commit;h=591cf938b52f4ac74b1fb0a259... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #44 from Ken Sharp <kennybobs(a)o2.co.uk> 2009-06-12 15:15:15 --- Closing. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15419 --- Comment #45 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2009-06-12 15:19:34 --- Good. Now the "Browse Apps" combo box needs the same fix, I think. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
participants (1)
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org