On 2 November 2013 13:35, Matthias Klumpp <matth...@tenstral.net> wrote: >> OCS is, generally, horribly designed. I am even hesitant to use the word >> ‘design’ in combination with OCS. It is really that bad, and why we did not >> use it for Bodega. > I agree with that, and this is the reason why I currently question the > use of OCS for AppStream. This still needs to be discussed with the > others, but I would rather like to use an improved OCS or a completely > new API for the AppStream Ratings&Review features (as well for maybe > payments, but that's a different issue).
Well, I've not done any technical review of the OCS code, but in Fedora I've chosen to use fedora-tagger for ratings and comments. It's not hardcoded and I'd be open to doing something else. > I like collaboration ;-) I still need to learn about Bodega, but e.g. > AppStream could adopt the ratings & reviews parts. The only thing > which AppStream always needs to care of is being distro- and > desktop-agnostic. Right. You have to make hard decisions too. Is a rating for gnome-calculator 3.8 on Ubuntu Linux applicable for gnome-calculator 3.10 on Fedora Linux? There are lots of thony issues about moderation if you allow {anonymous} user comments too. > On topic: I wanted to create a Wiki page about AppData in KDE and the > propose to adopt it ;-) It might still be worth to create one to > clarify the questions raised above. If you do, yell and I'll help fill in some details. Richard.