I'd like to understand more about the "3rd party app" process but I have
been experiencing the same level of frustration as Christian Reiner
(though he is much more polite!)
In troubleshooting after updating to 5.0.x, I bypassed the version check
only to have installs fail because the app was marked as "shipped". The
odd thing is that the app WAS "shipped" in the RPM from opensuse. By
passing the "shipped" check lead to failure because the app was "already
installed" (of course it was, it was shipped with the RPM!!!)
Would it not be better to "hide" apps that do not meet requirements
rather than failure after attempting install?
One more thing, can anyone explain why "required" parameter is the MAX
version and not, as I would expect, MIN version?
regards,
Drew
Thomas Müller wrote:
What about distinguishing the apps by installation source?
shipped and shopped (<- stupid name I know ;-) )
Tom
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Christian Reiner<[email protected]>
wrote:
Hello all,
sorry if I raise that issue again - but frankly I get annoyed with that issue:
Again some apps cannot be installed by just 'activating' them inside the
'apps' section of an ownCloud-5.0.3 installation. The result is the unfamous:
"the app cannot be installed because it is not compatible with this version of
ownCloud".
1.) this is just not true.
2.) the check that leads to this statement does not make sense.
3.) this issue has existed for quite some time now, why is it not fixed?
I do understand that this issue is not a direct problem for the "core apps"
developed and bundled by the core team. But if ownCloud really is meant to
attract a community of developers coding what is called "3rd party apps" (btw:
why "3rd"?), then such issues must be fixed. The issue has been addressed many
many times before and it is documented in the issue tracker.
I also do understand that it makes sense to have some means to block "old"
apps that are really not compatible with newer versions of ownCloud, since
these might crash the ownCloud core. Although in my eyes this is a
shortcomming of the plugin architecture ownCloud implements for apps, this is
another issue. The problem at hand is simply the version control check done -
which blocks many apps from being installed without any reason.
I am getting more and more frustrated having to adapt the appinfo/info.xml
file for apps every two weeks or so to prevent that apps are being blocked
again.
- Why is there no announcement that such thing is required? Are 3rd party app
developers meant to sniff that from thin air?
- Why is a change required anyway? I just stumbled over an app (the imprint
app) that could be installed fine inside OC-5.0.0. Now with OC-5.0.3 it is
blocked again. Why? Probably there is a reason why something was changed
again, but that means a change of the app API between two minor versions -
that is something one does not do. With good reasons. Especially not without
taking care that some backwards compatibility exists.
Christian Reiner (arkascha)
[ Probably cooled down again in a few hours ]
PS: and no personal offense meant, really not.
I just try to bring that issue up so that it is recognized as an urgent issue.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Owncloud mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/owncloud
