3 ms·

Thanks a lot to the team for these improvements As a normal man, in addition to the technical changelog, what would be interesting for me to have is a list of

by allan_s 11y ago

Thanks a lot to the team for these improvements As a normal man, in addition to the technical changelog, what would be interesting for me to have is a list of software that can now be run by wine, or that have a significantly improved experience with this version compare to 1.7

kencausey 11y ago
There is a lot of software for Windows. The time it takes to test even a small set of software is likely significantly larger than producing a new release.
- allan_s 11y ago
  sure, I'm not saying the team should take the burden of doing the testing on a given set of windows software (even the 100 most popular one, whatever it means) What I wanted to express is that, as I guess the development is followed by a community of people to which it has been said that future version of wine will fix their current compatibility problem, they may have got some feedback of said people "hey cool now whateversoft version x.y works" and gathered a list of said software, especially if it does include some big names.
  - yareally 11y ago
    > "What I wanted to express is that, as I guess the development is followed by a community of people to which it has been said that future version of wine will fix their current compatibility problem, they may have got some feedback of said people "hey cool now whateversoft version x.y works" and gathered a list of said software, especially if it does include some big names." I thought that's what this[1] was for. [1] https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=19444 https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iI...
    - allan_s 11y ago
      yes, that's what it is for outside of the release cycle to know if a given software work. But here it's an announcement where you explain changes to the community between previous version and this version. So I was thinking that it may have been interesting to have a brief list of software from the database you've linked that have turned form garbage to bronze etc.
  - 0xcde4c3db 11y ago
    At least in my experience, Wine compatibility is usually not binary. Programs don't go from "non-working" to "working" so much as they progress from "intolerable bugginess" to "tolerable bugginess" to "trivial bugginess", with the thresholds between those categories being highly subjective.
bcrescimanno 11y ago
Given the way Wine versioning works, I wouldn't expect any significant changes from the latest 1.7.x cycle. Wine uses the same versioning system that Linux used prior to (and perhaps after, I'm not sure) the 3.0 release. The second number represents a stable version if it's even or an unstable development version if it's odd. Odd releases are used to "build up" new features towards an even-numbered release.
- allan_s 11y ago
  Thanks for this information, I was thinking it was following semantic versionning and looking to the changelog I thought it was big changes.
- 0xcde4c3db 11y ago
  That convention/development model was dropped with Linux 2.6. Current Linux is essentially still the 2.6 series. Linus just felt silly having the same major version number for ~8 years and has switched to incrementing it whenever the fancy strikes him.
lbenes 11y ago
It's not in alpha like ReactOS. In my experience, most simple apps work well and many older games run perfectly. If there's something you want to run, check the app DB. It's complete and well maintained. https://appdb.winehq.org/ https://appdb.winehq.org/
- mintplant 11y ago
  And a good number of newer games, such as Guild Wars 2.

by allan_s 11y ago

kencausey 11y ago

There is a lot of software for Windows. The time it takes to test even a small set of software is likely significantly larger than producing a new release.

allan_s 11y ago
sure, I'm not saying the team should take the burden of doing the testing on a given set of windows software (even the 100 most popular one, whatever it means) What I wanted to express is that, as I guess the development is followed by a community of people to which it has been said that future version of wine will fix their current compatibility problem, they may have got some feedback of said people "hey cool now whateversoft version x.y works" and gathered a list of said software, especially if it does include some big names.
- yareally 11y ago
  > "What I wanted to express is that, as I guess the development is followed by a community of people to which it has been said that future version of wine will fix their current compatibility problem, they may have got some feedback of said people "hey cool now whateversoft version x.y works" and gathered a list of said software, especially if it does include some big names." I thought that's what this[1] was for. [1] https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=19444 https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iI...
  - allan_s 11y ago
    yes, that's what it is for outside of the release cycle to know if a given software work. But here it's an announcement where you explain changes to the community between previous version and this version. So I was thinking that it may have been interesting to have a brief list of software from the database you've linked that have turned form garbage to bronze etc.
- 0xcde4c3db 11y ago
  At least in my experience, Wine compatibility is usually not binary. Programs don't go from "non-working" to "working" so much as they progress from "intolerable bugginess" to "tolerable bugginess" to "trivial bugginess", with the thresholds between those categories being highly subjective.

bcrescimanno 11y ago

Given the way Wine versioning works, I wouldn't expect any significant changes from the latest 1.7.x cycle. Wine uses the same versioning system that Linux used prior to (and perhaps after, I'm not sure) the 3.0 release. The second number represents a stable version if it's even or an unstable development version if it's odd. Odd releases are used to "build up" new features towards an even-numbered release.

allan_s 11y ago
Thanks for this information, I was thinking it was following semantic versionning and looking to the changelog I thought it was big changes.
0xcde4c3db 11y ago
That convention/development model was dropped with Linux 2.6. Current Linux is essentially still the 2.6 series. Linus just felt silly having the same major version number for ~8 years and has switched to incrementing it whenever the fancy strikes him.

lbenes 11y ago

It's not in alpha like ReactOS. In my experience, most simple apps work well and many older games run perfectly. If there's something you want to run, check the app DB. It's complete and well maintained. https://appdb.winehq.org/ https://appdb.winehq.org/

mintplant 11y ago
And a good number of newer games, such as Guild Wars 2.