[maemo-developers] ... and QA of closed source applications?

[From: Henrik Hedberg]

Quim Gil wrote:

> In the "QA from extras-devel to extras-testing" thread we are discussing
>  a community quality process that relies heavily on the fact that the
> source code of an application and its dependencies is available. But
> happens with the closed source applications?

    This is a very important question, and even if some members of the 
maemo.org community may be hard core open source software enthusiastic 
using only free software in their devices, the reality is that there are 
even more opportunities to get very good software for the devices if we 
allow also non-free software to be a part of our community supported 
extras repository.

> There have been very popular and even community friendly apps that were
 > not open source, like Mauku or Canola.

    Just to clarify: Mauku was a closed source software at the very 
beginning, but the source code has been available and licensed under 
APLv2 since November 8, 2007. See http://garage.maemo.org/projects/mauku

> - Keep the same QA process where availability of source code is not
> determinant,

    I think the QA process of free and also non-free packages will be 
based mainly on usage of the software. The source code is not so 
important in either situation. Earlier, there were some thoughts about 
packages that are maintained by a maintainer who do not know the 
programming language of the software they are packaging. Respectively, I 
claim that the most of future extras testers will not be able to track 
the functionality of the software they are testing into source code 
level (they do not know the language, the source code is too 
complicated, there are too many lines to read, they have not enough time 
etc.). For example, how many of Mauku users have really checked what 
kind of dirty tricks I am doing with their Jaiku and Twitter accounts 
even if the source code has been available for a long time?

    Let's see, your criteria for extras applications were:

 > - Install and deinstall flawlessly.
 > - Don't bring conflicts in dependencies.
 > - Their info in the app manager is complete (icon, summary, URL to
 > project, updates info).
 > - Have decent page in maemo.org/downloads.
 > - Have a place to report issues to the developers.
 > - Don't crash or freeze systems.
 > - Don't drain batteries.
 > - Are feature complete: everything inside works.
 > - Have been tested by someone trusted before.

None of these criteria requires the source code to be available. Thus, 
the QA for non-free packages in extras should be the same than for free 
packages.

    BR,

    Henrik

-- 
    Henrik Hedberg  -  http://www.henrikhedberg.net/