http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
Summary: AppDB admin backend enhancements Product: WineHQ Apps Database Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: appdb-unknown AssignedTo: wine-bugs@winehq.org ReportedBy: saturn_systems@yahoo.com
Request the following enhancement be done for the AppDB admin backend.
Allow sorting on results:
For "Test Results" - be able to sort the results based on: * Release (Wine release) (and/or) * Has maintainer
and
For "Comments Management": So comments can be managed, show what app the comment relates to and if the app has a maintainer.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dimesio@earthlink.net
--- Comment #1 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2008-12-06 15:24:09 --- (In reply to comment #0)
For "Comments Management": So comments can be managed, show what app the comment relates to and if the app has a maintainer.
I definitely agree with this one. I'd like to work on cleaning out some of the outdated comments from apps without maintainers, but the only way to do this currently seems to be to browse every app, one by one. Even just having a link from each comment to the app entry it came from would help.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |alex@thehandofagony.com Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2009-04-05 11:46:21 --- The Admin Comments page now has app links :) Thanks for keeping your suggestions coming
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #3 from nathan.n saturn_systems@yahoo.com 2009-05-12 18:19:46 --- (In reply to comment #2)
The Admin Comments page now has app links :) Thanks for keeping your suggestions coming
Thanks for the the app links, would it be possible for the comments to be sorted by date and/or app? So that the older app comments can be reviewed.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2009-05-15 05:42:12 --- Yes, that's a good idea, and definitely possible. It shouldn't be too much work, but I'm not sure I'll be able to do it before my exams.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
Ken Sharp kennybobs@o2.co.uk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kennybobs@o2.co.uk
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2009-10-27 17:18:41 --- The comments are already sorted with oldest ones first. I'll add an option to only show comments for non-maintained apps.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #6 from Ken Sharp kennybobs@o2.co.uk 2009-10-27 17:23:23 --- A purge of comments pre-2008 might help too. There really are comments that old still on there. Is that easy to do?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #7 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2009-10-27 17:31:32 --- Shouldn't be too difficult, but I'm not sure if we want to delete all old comments. Perhaps we could add an option like 'Show old comments' on the app pages?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #8 from Ken Sharp kennybobs@o2.co.uk 2009-10-27 17:34:44 --- Wine was so different two years ago, there's no useful comments that old. It wouldn't be worth reading them either.
Move to pre-2007 and we're definitely talking useless.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #9 from Sven septim.dt@gmail.com 2009-10-27 17:49:18 --- There are also bugs of more than 3 years old. If, for instance, there was a discussion about one of them in the AppDB back then, then the things mentioned there could still be valid for newer versions of wine.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #10 from Ken Sharp kennybobs@o2.co.uk 2009-10-27 17:57:08 --- Discussions about bugs belong in Bugzilla. It is very unlikely that anything useless pertaining to a bug will be in a comment, and that bug will have been closed invalid long ago if it doesn't contain the necessary information.
A separate page for comments altogether would get rid of the pages and pages of, usually pointless, noise.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #11 from Sven septim.dt@gmail.com 2009-10-27 17:59:58 --- True, but discussions about possible workarounds don't belong in Bugzilla, but in the AppDB or in the forums.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #12 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2009-10-27 23:35:33 --- (In reply to comment #8)
Wine was so different two years ago, there's no useful comments that old. It wouldn't be worth reading them either.
Move to pre-2007 and we're definitely talking useless.
There are plenty of apps that don't get updated often with old bugs that are still present.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #13 from Ken Sharp kennybobs@o2.co.uk 2009-10-28 04:50:31 --- Find them then.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #14 from Sven septim.dt@gmail.com 2009-10-28 04:56:11 --- First App I thought of was Age Of Empires, and that one seems like a perfect example. The multiplayer function in AOE2 still doesn't work as far as I can see (the bug is still open) and the discussion about that in the AppDB started in 2006. So that might still be useful.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #15 from Ken Sharp kennybobs@o2.co.uk 2009-10-28 05:11:43 --- The note is already there explaining what to do. So the comments are redundant, again.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #16 from Sven septim.dt@gmail.com 2009-10-28 05:16:19 --- Yes, but they might still be useful in the future if the suggested workaround doesn't work, or if you walk into the same problems as someone else (like in this case getting to run the DLLs in the right way).
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #17 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2009-10-28 06:53:43 --- (In reply to comment #10)
A separate page for comments altogether would get rid of the pages and pages of, usually pointless, noise.
Right now they're at the bottom of the page, and users who don't like them have the option of not showing them at all. I fail to see how a separate page is any better; it certainly does not "get rid" of them.
For apps that have maintainers, deleting old comments is at the discretion of the maintainers. For apps that don't, we need to look at the comments individually to determine if they contain useful information or not. Yes, that's tedious work, but no one is being forced to do it.
Adding the option to only show comments for unmaintained apps on the comments management page would be very helpful to those of us who are willing to review comments individually.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #18 from Ken Sharp kennybobs@o2.co.uk 2009-10-31 10:21:46 --- What use is loading hundreds of comments nobody will ever read, every time a user opens the page to post yet another meaningless, pointless comment?
It's clear that maintainers can not be bothered deleting comments. Most maintainers just want their name in lights!
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=17421
Another page avoids having to load these comments at all, for users who actually bother to read notes and test results, which was the whole point of the AppDB in the first place.
Feel free to "read" the above comments.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #19 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2009-10-31 12:43:05 --- (In reply to comment #18)
What use is loading hundreds of comments nobody will ever read, every time a user opens the page to post yet another meaningless, pointless comment?
And where exactly is your data proving that NOBODY wants to read those comments?
Do not assume that your personal preferences are shared by everyone. Gauging from the strong reactions whenever this topic comes up, I'd say it's clear that many users like the comments and resent having them deleted.
As for the page you linked to as an example of the terrible hardship caused by all those useless comments, it loaded just as fast for me as pages without any comments, and the comments aren't even visible unless you intentionally scroll down past the test reports and maintainer notes. I fail to see any problem for those of us who don't want to read them. (Not that I would object to a separate page; I just don't see a pressing need.)
But none of this has anything to do with this bug, which is about enhancements to the admin backend. Putting comments on a separate page is a separate issue.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #20 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2009-11-13 04:51:25 --- It's now possible to only show comments/test results for unmaintained apps. Is there anything more that should be added?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #21 from Ken Sharp kennybobs@o2.co.uk 2009-11-20 19:16:23 --- (In reply to comment #19)
(In reply to comment #18)
What use is loading hundreds of comments nobody will ever read, every time a user opens the page to post yet another meaningless, pointless comment?
And where exactly is your data proving that NOBODY wants to read those comments?
Where's your evidence that they do?
<snip>
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #22 from nathan.n saturn_systems@yahoo.com 2009-11-20 22:29:21 --- (In reply to comment #20)
It's now possible to only show comments/test results for unmaintained apps. Is there anything more that should be added?
Alexander, Thanks for your improvements on the Admin backend
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #23 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2009-11-22 12:26:27 --- (In reply to comment #21)
(In reply to comment #19)
(In reply to comment #18)
What use is loading hundreds of comments nobody will ever read, every time a user opens the page to post yet another meaningless, pointless comment?
And where exactly is your data proving that NOBODY wants to read those comments?
Where's your evidence that they do?
Plenty of users (and some developers) go to read old comments to see how an application used to behave (did/didn't work, what features worked, etc.).
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #24 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2009-12-01 09:17:54 --- (In reply to comment #20)
It's now possible to only show comments/test results for unmaintained apps. Is there anything more that should be added?
The checkboxes to show only unmaintained apps on the comments and test results queues have been a BIG help. Could you do the same for the screenshots and bug links queues?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #25 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2009-12-07 07:23:58 --- Certainly. Done! :)
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #26 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2009-12-12 18:59:06 --- Alexander, thanks for all the improvements on the backend. If you're up for it, I have another request.
On the page for processing new application submissions, the system displays a list of like matches and partial matches and has links to move the data to any of those entries. The system, however, does not always pick up on matches due to typos, variations in spelling, etc. For example, I just processed a new submission for "DVDShrink," which already exists in the AppDB as "DVD Shrink," but which did not show up on the list of possible matches. In order to process it, I had to accept the new entry, then go to it and move the child objects to the existing entry. This is not the first time I have encountered this problem. We need a way to move the data from new application submissions to existing entries that we know are matches, even if the system doesn't.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #27 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2009-12-14 14:35:18 --- Ok, I've added a 'merge with another application' link below the search matches.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #28 from nathan.n saturn_systems@yahoo.com 2010-07-15 04:41:34 --- Just a idea I would like to record here for discussion.
For the "Common replies" section of each Queue would it make sense to have a way of changing the messages from a new menu for the appdb admins (called "Common replies"). I find myself cutting and pasting combinations of replies from the existing message listed, how about the other admins?
# App Queue # Version Queue # Screenshot Queue # Maintainer Queue # Test Results Queue # Bug Link Queue
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #29 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2010-07-15 08:39:53 --- (In reply to comment #28)
Just a idea I would like to record here for discussion.
For the "Common replies" section of each Queue would it make sense to have a way of changing the messages from a new menu for the appdb admins (called "Common replies"). I find myself cutting and pasting combinations of replies from the existing message listed, how about the other admins?
# App Queue # Version Queue # Screenshot Queue # Maintainer Queue # Test Results Queue # Bug Link Queue
I'm not quite sure what you mean by a new menu for admins (would it be different from the one for maintainers?), but the common replies do need work. I often find myself wanting to use more than one of the common replies in the same message and have to copy and paste.
The common replies are also now all the same for all the sections, and really should be customized, e.g., "do not paste debug output" doesn't make sense for screenshots, but "Please do not submit screenshots of error messages" would.
And there's one common reply I'd like to see added: "Based on the information in your report, your rating has been changed to conform to the rating definitions."
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #30 from nathan.n saturn_systems@yahoo.com 2010-07-27 18:57:25 --- (In reply to comment #29)
(In reply to comment #28)
I'm not quite sure what you mean by a new menu for admins (would it be different from the one for maintainers?),
Probably just an additional menu option for the admins.
The common replies are also now all the same for all the sections, and really should be customized, e.g., "do not paste debug output" doesn't make sense for screenshots, but "Please do not submit screenshots of error messages" would.
Exactly
And there's one common reply I'd like to see added: "Based on the information in your report, your rating has been changed to conform to the rating definitions."
Sadly needed.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #31 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2010-08-04 07:13:46 --- I agree, this is badly needed. The current way of hardcoding the replies in the AppDB source code does not really scale.
Here is my attempt to summarize your suggestions. Feel free to comment :)
- Add a page where common replies can be added/modified - A common reply can be assigned to one or more queues, so e.g. it will be possible to show the same reply for applications and versions, but not screenshots - Instead of selecting a common reply using a radiobox, clicking on a reply should add it to the admin reply text, so they can be edited - Maybe add the possibility to make a 'personal' common reply, which is not shared with other AppDB admins/maintainers?
Hopefully I will have time to look at this after GSoC :)
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #32 from nathan.n saturn_systems@yahoo.com 2010-09-09 20:38:38 CDT --- (In reply to comment #31)
Here is my attempt to summarize your suggestions. Feel free to comment :)
Looking forward to it, hope GSOC is going well?
More ideas, Simplifying the current howto/notes/warnings system, by only having one button to "Add note" and on the add note page provide a checkbox to select howto or notes or warning.
Be able to link directly to an individual "note" permalink?.
Be able to sort the notes on the page for display.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
nathan.n saturn_systems@yahoo.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- See Also| |http://bugs.winehq.org/show | |_bug.cgi?id=17613
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #33 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alexsornes@gmail.com 2011-04-23 10:21:45 CDT --- The changes for customizable common replies are now under way.
Clicking on a common reply will now add it directly tot he reply text field; support for editing the replies should be finished in a few days.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #34 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alexsornes@gmail.com 2011-04-24 06:04:33 CDT --- There is now a page for editing common replies (at the bottom of the AppDB Admin sidebar). They can be assigned to one or more queues, and are shown instead of the old hard-coded ones.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #35 from nathan.n saturn_systems@yahoo.com 2011-09-21 22:59:39 CDT --- Thank you Alexander for the updates
Would you happen to know why went logged in the "application comments" sections have the following lines at the top of each comment?
-- Deprecated: Function ereg_replace() is deprecated in /home/winehq/opt/appdb/include/util.php on line 124
Deprecated: Function ereg_replace() is deprecated in /home/winehq/opt/appdb/include/util.php on line 127
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #36 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alexsornes@gmail.com 2011-09-22 02:07:33 CDT --- They have upgraded the PHP version on the AppDB server. I'll have a look and fix it, but the messages should be harmless.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #37 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2011-09-22 05:12:54 CDT --- The screenshot queue, and the screenshot gallery when logged in, have the same problem:
Deprecated: Function eregi() is deprecated in /home/winehq/opt/appdb/include/user.php on line 459
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #38 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alexsornes@gmail.com 2011-09-27 05:39:00 CDT --- Hi,
I've made fixes for these, I just have to test them first.
However, I don't see the error messages myself. Have they disappeared for you as well?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #39 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2011-09-27 06:03:51 CDT --- They're only visible when logged in. I just checked with both Firefox and Opera, and they're still there.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #40 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alexsornes@gmail.com 2011-10-08 09:58:04 CDT --- I managed to reproduce the errors on my local appdb install, and I have committed fixes for them just now.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
--- Comment #41 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net 2012-05-04 11:59:35 CDT --- If you're still taking requests for backend improvements, one thing that is needed is a search box for the Maintainer Entries page. This is the only page on which we can manually remove a maintainer, but in order to find an entry, we have to search each page individually using our browser's Find function. This makes removing maintainers very time-consuming. (And since the automatic removal frequently breaks, it is something that needs to be done regularly.)
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #42 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net --- The original enhancements requested were added long ago, so I'm going to mark this fixed. Separate bugs should be filed for any additional AppDB admin backend enhancements that are requested.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16357
Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #43 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net --- Closing fixed AppDB bugs.
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org