[maemo-community] Maemo.org

From: Quim Gil quim.gil at nokia.com
Date: Wed Jan 28 10:37:10 EET 2009

ext Ryan Abel wrote:
> On Jan 27, 2009, at 12:14 PM, <jussi.h.makinen at nokia.com> <jussi.h.makinen at nokia.com 
>  > wrote:
>> Anyway in the future the in-device application manager should be the
>> gateway for Nokia tested applications and in this scenario the
>> maemo.nokia.com application gallery is merely a marketing showcase for
>> those non-device owners. This is the reason why the ratings and
>> commeting system might not be needed for maemo.nokia.com. So I think  
>> we
>> agree on most of the stuff here :)
> This is something that we've been pushing for for a while. However,  
> our goal was to integrate it with Downloads (h-a-m and  
> downloads.maemo.org would be two interfaces to the same thing), it  
> seems like you're discussing a more App Store-like approach with more  
> gatekeeping by Nokia, though.[1] I'd _really_ like to see Nokia help  
> set up a QA and certification system through maemo.org and Extras,  
> rather than pulling them from us and running them through a separate  
> certification process and pushing them through their own channels.
> This is something we've been working towards on our own, but getting  
> Nokia help in this (and not having them duplicate our efforts  
> elsewhere) would be really wonderful.[2]
> [1]http://wiki.maemo.org/Task:Improving_the_Application_manager
> [2]http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras_repository_process_definition

As I see it, there needs to be common QA criteria (since users want
things that just work, no matter where they come from) in 2 different
distribution channels (because assessing quality in closed+commercial
mode can't be done in the same way than open+community mode).

You can define ways to automate some kind of security and quality
criteria based on open source packages by building them, scaning the
code and what not. But you can't do the same with a binary, even less a
binary that needs to be somehow certified the same day product X
launches, before any kind of previous public testing. Also distributing
software for free is a totally different game that distributing software
for 1 cent.

I don't see maemo.org handling commercial agreements on confidentiality
and payment platforms, so we are in fact talking about different
distribution channels.

But same quality criteria (and here Nokia should help) and also a good
infrastructure and process to evaluate how well a piece of software
meets those criteria (which is also the interest of Nokia and therefore
Nokia should help).

Quim Gil
open source advocate
Maemo Software @ Nokia

More information about the maemo-community mailing list