[maemo-developers] Extras-testing improvements

[From: Riku Voipio]

On 03/09/2010 02:19 PM, ext Simon Pickering wrote:
>> Also, the idea that an application can both be "low quality" and "end
>> user ready" is bizarre.

> If the general Nokia view is that Extras apps should also look pretty
> and have nice design (i.e. so they reflect well on the device), which is
> a good goal for all apps, but should not be a requirement, then we need
> another repo layer between Extras-testing and Extras proper, where apps
> that work but are perhaps not up to the stringent prettiness standards
> can be placed.

I do not represent the general view of my employer or anyone else, just 
myself. But poor quality applications reflect badly on maemo.org 
community as well. Do you want to be part of a community which is known 
for its low quality standards? Notice that the current extras-testing QA 
requirements are quite low:

1. [ ] Bug database exist.

Annoying, but not hard to add (particularly if you choose a tmo thread 
instead of bugzilla).

2. [ ] Licensing ok.
3. [ ] No illegal/dubious content.

Yep, no piracy is acceptable.

4. [ ] Working provided features.

Yep. crashing apps are bad.

5. [ ] No missing announced features.

If something doesn't work (yet), don't advertize it. Don't dissapoint users.

6. [ ] Optification ok.

Should we start accepting packages that break SSUs ?

7. [ ] No performance problems.
8. [ ] No power management issues.

This could be clarified to belong only to always-running apps (such as 
hildon-desktop plugins).

9. [ ] No known security risks.

This is a bit sketchy, but certainly allowing things like "default 
password ssh server" would be very very bad for endusers.