-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
17.05.2012 17:05, Jari Vetoniemi wrote:
This is unless the appdb will allow us to filter out test results that were either done with patched wine, or some unsupported variant like POL or such.
That's is exactly the same vision as mine: AppDB is about unpatched Wine, sure, but from end-user PoV patches are as valid workarounds as anything else. Still, patches are relatively hard to install and use, so AppDB should distinguish test results submitted for patched Wine from test results submitted for unpatched Wine and allow end-users to filter out what they want. If it would be that way - every user would easily find the results that apply to his Wine usage case. One don't want to use anything other than "almost vanilla" Wine supplied with his/her distro? NP, filter out results for unpatched Wine. One feels comfortable with patching and compiling Wine (or installing packages from untrusted third-party PPA/repos)? OK, here are the results for patched versions. And so on.
IMHO it'd be better that the current situation when I as a app maintainer have to deal with co-maintainers accepting restults that shouldn't be accepted at a first place (and simply deleting results without the ability to mark them back as a "Rejected - please, improve and resubmit" is a bit... em... rude), and with flood of incorrect test results from users who use patched Wine and pretty sure that it's OK to post results for it having ratings like "Platinum" or "Gold". Yesterday I spent half or a day rejecting the results for Diablo III and sending PMs to result posters describing why it wasn't possible to accept results from them. Most replies I've got were people complaining about AppDB not giving them a possibility to mark their results as being for patched Wine or questions about "then why had the test result X for app Y was accepted?".
- -- Best regards, Alexey Loukianov mailto:mooroon2@mail.ru System Engineer, Mob.:+7(926)218-1320 *nix Specialist