Oh, I see. It doesn't work like that. You should only be reporting for a version you tested and not what you heard someone else was using. I'm not a fan of multiple versions listed to begin with. I'm interested in the primary version someone tested with, e.g. 3 hours with version X vs 3 minutes with version Y.
In your case I was assuming you quite possibly had close to equal amount of testing with different versions given you started with 1.6.2 then switched. At least I was presuming you switched. Test results with 1.6.2 (actually 3 years out of date) are uninteresting without a valid reason.
It's fine, & at times useful, to mention down in the Details/Notes that specific Wine build Z seems to run well or this person had good luck with version K.
I think this goes a bit too far since I don't think eiii is less trustworthy than I am, although he seems to not have tested 2.0 for long, so I'll remove that one.
A lot of people run WINE 1.6.2 due to the simple reason that it's the one that comes with Mint 18.1, so it's not irrelevant at all.
Of course the fact that current Mint comes with such an old version is terrible, but that's how it is.
I was looking at posts from gogtrial34987 and adamhm when making my post, that's why I went to the trouble with the two checksums.
The first post in the thread is an utter mess. If you want a specific structure, you should state and show it there.
In your case I was assuming you quite possibly had close to equal amount of testing with different versions given you started with 1.6.2 then switched. At least I was presuming you switched.
You presumed wrong, I was finishing the game first before and will switch today.
I've removed the stock wine now and installed 2.0.1 but wine-config still shows 1.6.2, is this normal?