On 11 January 2017 at 15:52, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > This amount of breakage (65 packages, *despite* validation)
Most of those packages don't validate the AppData file... > and no filtering should be done during display. It isn't -- that status page is for apps that don't even get into the metadata. > If there are some issues with an appdata entry, both users and the > package maintainers would be much better served if it is displayed, > even imperfect and ugly, than not at all. You mean just display a stock broken image for the application icon? No description for markup problems? > It would be much easier to > diagnose things, and would probably encourage more people to fix those > visual issues. Currently it's just too easy to never see the problem. > Filtering in this final "user" stage just seems to be in the wrong > place, and goes against the principle of gentle degradation. I think the opposite might be the solution; fail the rpmbuild if the appdata is invalid. Then the packager knows at build time rather than having to check some random status page. Richard _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
