On 12.10.2012 11:28, Christian Reiner wrote:
Hi,
I am sorry if I hurt any feelings by using the term 'censorship'. That
certainly was not my intention. That's why I made the notion that this term is
not meant in a bad way.
I do not want to fight over a term, a word. In effect a group of people judges
if something created by someone else is published or held back. I don't know
how else to call that...
Maybe at worst "Elitist boy club behaviour" ;-). But its not. It's a
good initiative to ensure safety and fun for the users.
The review workgroup will have an important and not easy role here.
Beside just reviewing they also can help to fix not conforming apps.
I also agree that good written guidelines for this are needed, and even
if they will grow and mature over time I think a first version should be
there before we start to make that reality.
Also I think its important to clearly state what a passed review means
for the users: Do we as a project take full responsibility for the app
or not? I think we should not, it is still the responsibility of the
user who enables an app, even if it passed the review. But an open word
helps here.
Another great thing would be a script that performs checks for
conforming, developed in the open. That can be plugin based so that the
level of nagging can be adjusted. That helps the workgroups and the
developer and if its easy enough to provide plugins this will nicely
evolve over time. Maybe rpmlint is a good example.
regards,
Klaas
_______________________________________________
Owncloud mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/owncloud
