[AppDB] Beef up the Application Rating Guidelines

[Francois Gouget]

I feel that the current 'Maintainers Ratings System Help' is awfully 
vague and needs to be beefed up. So I'm attaching a proposal in which I 
tried to keep the original spirit but make things more precise.

* First I'd like to rename this page from
       Maintainers Ratings System Help
    to
       Maintainer's Application Rating Guidelines
    - I added 'Application' to the title because that's 
what is being rated, not the maintainers.
    - I removed 'System' because it does not bring anything.
    - And I changed 'Help' to 'Guidelines' because this page does not 
juse tries to help maintainers give a random rating to an application, 
it tries to define which rating an application can have depending on how 
it runs.
    - Finally once the old ratnig system is removed we can remove 
"Maintainer's" since there will be only one left.

* I've also reversed the order of the medals, because it seems a more 
logical progression and can simplify the explanations: in order to get a 
Silver medal you must pass all the criterias for a Bronze medal, plus 
some new ones.

* I still feel there's a huge gap between 'Garbage' and 'Bronze' and 
that it would be interesting to have statistics about the percentage of 
applications that fail to install, and those that install but crash on 
startup, both cases which are included in the Garbage category along 
with those that install and start up but are still not usable.
    (Chocolate and Tin medals?)

I'm attaching the full file as it's much easier to read than a diff. 
I'll send a diff to wine-patches once the final form has been reached. 
For reference the original can be found there:
http://appdb.winehq.org/help/?topic=maintainer_ratings

Francois Gouget wrote:
> I feel that the current 'Maintainers Ratings System Help' is awfully 
> vague and needs to be beefed up. So I'm attaching a proposal in which I 
> tried to keep the original spirit but make things more precise.
> - First I'd like to rename this page from
>    Maintainers Ratings System Help
> to
>    Maintainer's Application Rating Guidelines
> - I added 'Application' to the title because that's what is being
>
> rated, not the maintainers.
> - I removed 'System' because it does not bring anything.
> - And I changed 'Help' to 'Guidelines' because this page does not
>
> juse tries to help maintainers give a random rating to an application, 
> it tries to define which rating an application can have depending on how 
> it runs.
> - Finally once the old ratnig system is removed we can remove
>
> "Maintainer's" since there will be only one left.
> - I've also reversed the order of the medals, because it seems a more
>
> logical progression and can simplify the explanations: in order to get a 
> Silver medal you must pass all the criterias for a Bronze medal, plus 
> some new ones.
> - I still feel there's a huge gap between 'Garbage' and 'Bronze' and
>
> that it would be interesting to have statistics about the percentage of 
> applications that fail to install, and those that install but crash on 
> startup, both cases which are included in the Garbage category along 
> with those that install and start up but are still not usable.
>    (Chocolate and Tin medals?)

How about:

- "Also Ran" for those that install and start up but are still not usable.

and

- "Did Not Finish" for those that install but crash on startup.

These are at least slightly intuitive and stay in with the "Prize or award" motif.

--

Tony Lambregts