Tony, does support appears to address your concerns that we lost functionality It looks good to me.
Chris On Saturday 05 February 2005 5:43 am, Jonathan Ernst wrote: > Le vendredi 04 février 2005 à 23:33 -0500, Chris Morgan a écrit : > > Tony pointed out a handful of cases where it is useful to have multiple > > urls for an appId and perhaps multiple urls for a versionId. Do we have > > that functionality right now via another mechanism? I think we should > > look to add such a capability back into the appdb since it was used for a > > small number of apps. > > > > Chris > > I'd be interested to know about these cases, do you have examples ? > > An example of app where we have URLs in application is here: > http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?appId=10 (Word). IMHO (if the > examples you are speaking about are like the Word example), in this case > it is much more clear to put the link in the description than to have > only a one-word description for each link. > > _BEFORE WITH URLS IN APPS_ > ------------------------------------ > ¦ AbiWord ¦ ¦ > ¦ CrossOver Office ¦ Description ¦ > ¦ OpenOffice.org ¦ ¦ > ------------------------------------ > > _APPS NOW_ > ------------------------------------ > ¦ Description ¦ > ¦ ¦ > ¦ Try it with CrossOver Office ! ¦ > ¦ ¦ > ¦ *Native alternatives:* ¦ > ¦ - AbiWord ¦ > ¦ - OpenOffice.org ¦ > ------------------------------------ > > As you can see you can be much more descriptive and classify the > interesting links. > > In versions URLs have still a lot of sense as you can do thinks like: > ------------------------------------ > ¦ Download app ¦ ¦ > ¦ Download MSX.dll ¦ Description ¦ > ¦ ¦ ¦ > ------------------------------------ > > See here for example: http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?versionId=2463 > > As I said I'd be interested to see these special cases where App URLs > make sense. If there are more than only 4-5 application that need it and > you think that the way to do it above is not right in these cases (or in > all cases) we should of course bring back this feature. > > To bring it back: > 1) readd appid in appdata table: bad as it is strange to have columns > with appid=0 for screenshots and versionid=0 for URLs > > OR > > 2) rename appdata in versiondata, create a new appdata table and create > an url class that has an appid and version id parameter, if appid is > given, queries will be made in appdata and if it's versionid they'll be > made in versiondata > > OR > > 3) readd appid in appdata table and let people ad screenshots for > applications (this can be screenshot of the application running in > windows to show people how it looks like normally). I personnaly don't > like it too much as the purpose of removing App URLs and version > Keywords was to remove the bloat in editing pages to ease the task of > maintainers and try to have a consistant appdb. > > OR > > ... > > Regards. > Jonathan