Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center
przemek.klosowski at nist.gov
Tue Jan 28 18:43:09 UTC 2014
On 01/25/2014 05:08 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> I can think
>> of several programs that I use daily that are simple enough so that there's
>> not much development happening to them. For example, the 'units' program,
>> which I showed recently to some mechanical engineers who use Linux and they
>> went 'OMG this is so cool, how come we didn't know about it even though
>> we've been using Linux for ten years'.
> Right. If it's a GUI application, and is indeed awesome, I'd hope that
> the Fedora packager could write an AppData file, take some
> screenshots, include it as a source in the RPM and build a new version
> of the package. This way is a workaround for an abandoned-upstream but
> awesome/complete package.
There are two separate issues here: 'abandonment', and 'GUIness'. As to
the latter, I think it's a mistake to have a primary application
installation tool that only deals with GUI apps, because it relegates
text-based tools, such as 'units', to a second-class status of being
hard to find and to install. Similarly, at least some apps with inactive
upstream are fine the way they are and do not deserve to be locked up in
The real distinction lies somewhere else: everyone agrees that we should
promote excellent and useful apps, while deprecating the deficient ones.
Neither GUIness nor the speed of current development is an accurate
measure of that; I believe that user feedback, a la Google App Store's
user ranking, is the only reasonable way to classify the apps for
promotion and visibility.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel