> > It sounds like the problem is that the version string in appdb isn't > descriptive enough. It's perfectly reasonable to wonder if a given > program can be made to work with a patched version of wine, and wonder > how well it will work. It's also reasonable to wonder how it will > work with a vanilla version. Both types of reports are useful to have > in the appdb. Having a version "x.x.x (patched)" available to > reporters would allow both types of reports to be clearly separated. >
Patched with what? Lumping all the different possibilities into one "version" is also misleading. IMO, the appropriate rating for apps that can only be made to work by patching Wine is bronze: "Application works, but it has some issues, even for normal use..." Perhaps the wording can be changed to explicitly mention patching as one of the possible "issues" warranting a bronze, but I think the basic definition already fits. -- Rosanne DiMesio <dime...@earthlink.net>
