21.1.2014 21:34, Martin Grimme:
You can compare
those in their function to Maemo Extras and Maemo Extras Devel in the old N900
days.
Everybody could upload to Extras Devel, but to get stuff into Extras, it had
to pass a quarantine and a (IMHO slow and frustrating) QA phase.
Only Extras was pre-enabled on sales devices, and even for this, Nokia
had to be
convinced first, that apps reaching Extras are ready for regular users.
Just a slight correction. As far as I know, you can only upload source code
to Extras-Devel which is built by the Maemo Autobuilder and the
resulting binary package
published. I'm quite sure you can't upload binary packages at all, at
least I have not seen
any in all those years in Extras-Devel.
On the other hand both OpenRepos and Harbour currently only accept
binary packages,
at least until the OpenRepos <-> OBS bridge is online.
So when we are doing comparisons, I would say Harbour is closer to the
Ovi store, as available on Fremantle and Harmattan:
* binary only upload
* cross package dependencies not supported (bundle-all approach)
* IIRC, there were no limits on packaging scripts
* centralized mandatory QA with a multi-day QA period
(at least the Harbour QA seems to repply in a more comprehensible
manner, unlike the sometimes very confusing responses of the late Ovi
store QA drones)
* rules where the apps should store its file (data goes to /opt,
deploying binaries to path not allowed, ...)
* mandatory major.minor.build numbering
* as Profilematic is in Ovi store, it looks like it was possible to
install daemons and bind to events
* location was supported over QtMobility
* some semi-sane requirements for apps not to stop working due to upgrades
* also only one-way user->store feedback and comments
* unlike current Harbour, Ovi had a Web interface
* no Android apps, but flooded by automatically made RSS-reader apps :)
_______________________________________________
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
