[maemo-developers] Extras-testing improvements

[From: Dave Neary]

Hi,

Niels Breet wrote:
> You have to see that Extras should be for applications that are of a high
> quality. The Extras repository should not give any problems to people who
> are new to Maemo and have no clue how to work with linux for instance.

I think if extras-testing were easy to optionally enable for everyone
the problem would be lessened - the QA work could then be done by people
interested in the QA work, and the developers could concentrate on
making great apps.

> Developers who want to have their applications available for the largest
> audience possible, should consider this. If adding a link to a bugtracker
> is too hard for a developer, can we really expect a quality application
> from them?

I don't think that the bugtracker is the sticking point, and it's a bit
disingenuous to say so.

"Optified and dependencies are optified too" puts a burden on a
developer vis à vis dependencies.

"License files included and headers have copyright/license" adds an
extra requirement on developers over & above that which they usually
have to do - headers usually aren't required to have a license block, as
long as they refer to the licence & include it in the distribution.

"No power management problems", "no known security issues" and "no
performance problems" (in the checklist) sets the bar quite high for
most community-built apps, I would have thought.

The issue is: as a developer shipping software that I build in the
evenings, how much effort am I willing to put into ensuring the widest
distribution possible? The answer might well be: not *that* much.

> If your app works but is not yet ready for prime time, then consider what
> your audience is. Technical users will know where to find it.

Right now, that's not the case. If we add an unchecked extras-testing
repository to HAM on devices, that would be true.

Cheers,
Dave.

-- 
maemo.org docsmaster
Email: dneary at maemo.org
Jabber: bolsh at jabber.org