On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:42 AM, Niels Breet <[email protected]> wrote: > You have to see that Extras should be for applications that are of a high > quality. The Extras repository should not give any problems to people who > are new to Maemo and have no clue how to work with linux for instance. > > Developers who want to have their applications available for the largest > audience possible, should consider this. If adding a link to a bugtracker > is too hard for a developer, can we really expect a quality application > from them?
I can understand why we would want to move in this direction but as I've been following the extras discussion this is *not* what Extras has been and we need to keep that in mind. This is a change and not existing policy. On the first bug day we got a bit carried away and down voted things. A couple days later we had a discussion on here about it and realized we possibly went too far, they were items not in the criteria though we considered them important if we were judging for "high quality". Also something I worry about who defines what high quality is? That I have no bugs filed against me? No one ships bug free. That I meet some random person's idea of aesthetics? What if I completely disagree with them? Will this be like government regulations where they increase year to year and we have to jump through more hoops all the time just to continue to have the "honor" of being in Extras? On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Attila Csipa <[email protected]> wrote: > There is nothing preventing (well, apart from autobuilder issues) people > putting things into Extras-devel. It *is* a valid place for software, it's > not the gutter, and not every application there is expected to enter Extras. > I often feel the issues brought up in relation with the term 'quality' stem > from different interpretations of the term -> terminology. I disagree, it is the gutter. As a developer I only leave extras-devel enabled long enough to install my software and test it in prep for extras-testing. I'm glad there is demotion support added to or going to be added to extras-testing so some of the junk in their can be removed. Maybe to resolve this we should create a second official repository. >From extras-testing you can either promote to Extras (for end-users) or Extras-Hacking. Why Extras-Hacking and not just extras-devel? * They can leave it enabled to get updates (I sure hope people don't leave extras-devel enabled) * They know more easily what updates are tested and endorsed by the author * We don't need to increase the frequency of sending people to the wild-west of extras-devel with all the scary warnings. Instead its a "hey, there is this place with less polished apps" * They will continue to have basic guarantees like the app being optified. And probably many more that are escaping me at the moment. > If we want an uncontrolled place for apps then we need the "extras-author" > someone suggested yesterday. There is nothing stopping us creating that. > But, if we do then my prediction is that Extras will be dead within 3 months. > If there is a place where user's can look for "latest and greatest" apps then > everyone will enable it, developers will stop bothering to promote their apps > to Extras, and a short time later, everyone's devices will start to die > because the apps there are not optified, run down the battery, etc. I don't know if I'd go that far. The type of end-user who never tweaks their device would leave the "high quality extras" around. The person who is disgruntled with the mapping solution and is willing to use a less-than-perfect maemo mapper due to all of its features, then yes, they will be using the "good enough extras". With the number of people who unfortunately run out of extras-devel, I feel an "good enough extras" would be very popular. Ed Page _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
