Alexander Bisogiannis píše v St 15. 02. 2017 v 15:10 +0000:
On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 07:47 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I think it's okay to also present third-party software, but it
> needs to
> be clear to users how that software fits into the promise. It's not
> just where they are downloading it from, but what it means to
> download
> software from somewhere else. If it's included in Software, does it
> mean that we are making the same promises about integration
> quality?
> Does it mean the software will follow (at least) Fedora's support
> lifecycle? Does it mean that I can ask Fedora for help?
>
I have found that Software does not show third party packages, which
is
confusing, since it lets users add third party repos in the first
place.
If I am allowed to add RPMFusion using the Software GUI, it should
then
also give me a list of the packages that are contained in the repo I
just installed, maybe with a red watermark saying that this is a
third
party binary and it might break your system.
Else, just don't allow adding repos in this way and instead, force
the
user to do it manually, thus making it clear (in a passive aggressive
way) that they have to know what they are doing, since they want to
use
third party packages which are not tested by the Fedora QA team.
Apart from the above issue, I am a big fan of Software :)
Software doesn't show packages, it shows applications and those are
defined by AppStream metadata (which can be shipped in packages,
flatpaks,...). So first the app needs to ship the metadata, then the
repo needs to provide a database built on such metadata which is then
used by Software.
So if you want to see apps from RPM Fusion, they each need to ship
their own appdata files and the maintainer of the repo then needs to
build a database from it. I think there was some initiative led by
Ankur Sinha to do it, but I'm not sure if it was ever finished.
Jiri