On 03/09/2010 01:29 PM, ext Matan Ziv-Av wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Attila Csipa wrote:
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 11:56:49 Matan Ziv-Av wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Niels Breet 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.
Here's the problem, there seems to be two (almost opposite) goals for
this extras repository: one is to be a collection of all maemo software,
eliminating the use of external repositories, the other is having a
collection only of high quality software. Until you accept that
you can't have both, those discussions will go on repeating.
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.
The extras-devel wiki page defines this repository as a repository of
programs that are not ready for end-users. Since my package is ready for
end users, extras-devel is not the repository for it. It also makes no
sense for me to suggest to users who want to install my package to
enable a repository that may crash and burn their device.
The whole point of extras-testing is to weed out enduser ready
applications from applications from applications that crash and burn
your device. If your application is ready for endusers, it should pass
via extras-testing. If it doesn't pass, either it is not ready, or the
extras-testing process is broken. The latter is what we are fixing here
in this thread.
Also, the idea that an application can both be "low quality" and "end
user ready" is a bizarre.
_______________________________________________
maemo-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
