On 09/13/2010 01:28 PM, ext Warren Baird wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Quim Gil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> - Should we have several grades of MeeGo compliance applications? And >>> what is a purpose of the "MeeGo compliant application" concept? >> >> For clarity, I would restrict the word "compliance" to the official >> MeeGo compliance based on the official API. "A MeeGo compliant app runs >> on any MeeGo compliant device". If we dilute this we are opening a >> Pandora's box. >> >> The MeeGo Extras stable repository would contain apps tested to work on >> top of official MeeGo releases. No "compliance" word needed: they are >> "extras". > > Hmm. That does solve the problem --- but it seems to me that having > Extras - which might well be the vast majority of MeeGo apps, at least > initially - not have some kind of official 'stamp' is a weakness, at > least on the PR side...
If the 'commercial' apps can't capture the energy of a successful MeeGo Extras then we have a problem elsewhere, but still you are making a good point. Well, an app in MeeGo Extras passing the MeeGo compliance test *is* a MeeGo compliant app in its full right. Maybe there is a way to distinguish those? A Good Thing is that any commercial store know that these apps run on top of MeeGo without needing additional dependencies, and they also know these apps have gone through a transparent QA process. > App developers might well view it as a slight that their apps aren't > compliant, and users might well be less inclined to run apps that > aren't officially compliant... Still, the apps in MeeGo Extras relying on unofficial toolkits and libraries would still "work" and even be "stable" but I still think the term "MeeGo compliant" should be avoided. Developers and end users interested in those should understand the implications. > > I think it's valuable to have a set of rules to define "A well behaved > app that should be safe for a user to install" while not going as far > as the current definition of 'MeeGo Compliance', and some kind of > official recognition of such apps. > > I've seen other programs like this that have different levels of > compliance... I could see something like: > MeeGo Conforming App: depend only on things in Extras, compile > successful on the build system and pass a series of automated tests, > etc. > MeeGo Compliant App: what's currently in the compliance spec. > > Apps on the app store would need to be compliant, apps on Extras need > to be Conforming. > > Thoughts? I think we agree on the principles even if we still need to fine tune the words. :) -- Quim Gil MeeGo advocate _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
