On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Quim Gil <quim....@nokia.com> wrote: > > >> - Should we have several grades of MeeGo compliance applications? And >> what is a purpose of the "MeeGo compliant application" concept? > > For clarity, I would restrict the word "compliance" to the official > MeeGo compliance based on the official API. "A MeeGo compliant app runs > on any MeeGo compliant device". If we dilute this we are opening a > Pandora's box. > > The MeeGo Extras stable repository would contain apps tested to work on > top of official MeeGo releases. No "compliance" word needed: they are > "extras".
Hmm. That does solve the problem --- but it seems to me that having Extras - which might well be the vast majority of MeeGo apps, at least initially - not have some kind of official 'stamp' is a weakness, at least on the PR side... App developers might well view it as a slight that their apps aren't compliant, and users might well be less inclined to run apps that aren't officially compliant... I think it's valuable to have a set of rules to define "A well behaved app that should be safe for a user to install" while not going as far as the current definition of 'MeeGo Compliance', and some kind of official recognition of such apps. I've seen other programs like this that have different levels of compliance... I could see something like: MeeGo Conforming App: depend only on things in Extras, compile successful on the build system and pass a series of automated tests, etc. MeeGo Compliant App: what's currently in the compliance spec. Apps on the app store would need to be compliant, apps on Extras need to be Conforming. Thoughts? Warren -- Warren Baird - Photographer and Digital Artist http://www.synergisticimages.ca _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list MeeGo-dev@meego.com http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
