About Community and Official Apps



Hi all

I wish to start an open discussion about official and community apps.

Currently, we have 2 different app’s lists.
The official list is for applications which are “validated” by the YunoHost apps team. That list implies also that those apps are well maintained, up to date, and stable for the community.

The reality is, almost a third of those apps don’t had any update in the last 6 month.
More than half of them don’t have any “official” maintainer.

And there wasn’t any new official app since January this year, mainly because we already have too much work with the current ones which aren’t really maintained…

In the meantime, there’s a lot of community apps as good as official ones, and even better. Still, it’s highly recommended to not trust a community apps but to have full confidence in a Official one.

With our current rules, the only way to reassure users that an app is fully working and follow all the rules to be a high quality app package is to be official.

I don’t think that’s really fair for all the packagers who’re constantly trying to keep their apps to their best.
Still, making all those apps official isn’t possible because of the limited time of the members of the apps group.

Thus, I would propose to think about a new state, between Official and Community for high quality community apps.
Those apps would still be maintained by their original maintainer, without intervention of the apps group. But, being regularly updated and stick to the standards of packaging, those app could be highlighted as high quality apps.

For being considered as a high quality community app (A name would be better…), my proposition, to be discussed of course, is that:

  • Keep the app up to date regarding the upstream source (If possible, regarding of how YunoHost is working)
  • Keep the package up to date regarding the last packaging recommendation. Means following what’s going on about it.
  • Keep the app level 7. Of course, if it’s going down, we’ll let time for the packagers to fix the app.
  • Also, to be really discussed, I think it would be interesting that any PR has a review from one member of apps group. A simple approval would be enough. Just to be sure that there’s isn’t any modification that would not stick to the status.
  • Maybe also a check every X month to check if the app is still ok.

About the code in the core of YunoHost. Actually, I’m not sure we need any. I think we could just add a new app list for those apps. And keep them as well in the community list.
And maybe later add a specific status for that.

What’s your point of view about this idea ?

(Traduction automatique par DeepL)

Salut tout le monde

Je souhaite lancer une discussion ouverte sur les applications officielles et communautaires.

Actuellement, nous avons 2 listes d’applications différentes.
La liste officielle est pour les applications qui sont “validées” par l’équipe des applications YunoHost. Cette liste implique également que ces applications sont bien maintenues, à jour et stables pour la communauté.

La réalité est que près d’un tiers de ces applications n’ont pas eu de mise à jour au cours des 6 derniers mois.
Plus de la moitié d’entre elles n’ont pas de mainteneur “officiel”.

Et il n’y a pas eu de nouvelle application officielle depuis janvier de cette année, principalement parce que nous avons déjà trop de travail avec les applications actuelles qui ne sont pas vraiment maintenues…

En attendant, il y a beaucoup d’applications communautaires aussi bonnes que les applications officielles, et même mieux. Néanmoins, il est fortement recommandé de ne pas faire confiance aux applications community mais d’avoir une confiance totale en une application official.

Avec nos règles actuelles, la seule façon de rassurer les utilisateurs qu’une application fonctionne pleinement et de suivre toutes les règles pour être un package de haute qualité est d’être officiel.

Je ne pense pas que ce soit vraiment juste pour tous les packagers qui essaient constamment de garder leurs applications à leur meilleur niveau.
Cependant, rendre toutes ces applications officielles n’est pas possible en raison du temps limité des membres du groupe apps.

Ainsi, je propose de réfléchir à un nouvel état, entre Official et Community pour des applications communautaires de haute qualité.
Ces applications seraient toujours maintenues par leur mainteneur d’origine, sans intervention du groupe d’applications. Mais, étant régulièrement mises à jour et respectant les standards de packaging, ces applications pourraient être mises en avant comme des applications de haute qualité.

Pour être considéré comme une application community de haute qualité (un nom serait mieux…), ma proposition, à discuter bien sûr, est la suivante :

  • Maintenir l’application à jour en ce qui concerne la source en amont (Si possible, par rapport au fonctionnement de YunoHost)
  • Tenez le package à jour par rapport aux dernières recommandations de packaging. Donc aussi suivre ce qui se passe à ce sujet.
  • Maintenir l’application le niveau 7. Bien sûr, si ça se passe mal, on laissera le temps aux packagers de réparer l’application.
  • Aussi, doit être vraiment discuté, je pense qu’il serait intéressant que n’importe quel PR ait une review de la part d’un membre du groupe Apps. Une simple approbation suffirait. Juste pour être sûr qu’il n’y a pas de modification qui ne respecterait pas le statut.
  • Peut-être aussi une vérification tous les X mois pour vérifier si l’application est toujours OK.

A propos du code dans le core de YunoHost. En fait, je ne suis pas sûr qu’on en ait besoin. Je pense que nous pourrions simplement ajouter une nouvelle liste d’applications pour ces applications. Et les gardez aussi dans la liste Community.
Et peut-être plus tard ajoutera-t-on un statut spécifique pour cela.

Quel est votre point de vue sur cette idée ?


I agree, if a packager gets busy for some weeks/months his/her apps don’t gets updated and if someone else don’t get motivated to update the apps they are not even kept updated with the upstream sources.
The Yunohost helpers have evolved and now its much more simple to bring the app to Yunohost.
The community apps size has grown and there are apps which are getting updated more often then official apps. This definitely raises questions that if these regularly maintained apps should come to official community. Moreover having warning for the apps which are maintained regularly is not fair, as if there is bug in the app the maintainer tries to fix it.
We should even define some rules to put an app to working, in progress and not working as some of the working apps are “in progress” and some broken apps are in “working” state.
The current problem is if the maintainer is not using the app for himself he/she looses the interest to maintain the app.
The main problem with community which I see is that if a packager don’t package remove script properly the Yunohost can break or there can be a security issue like the port remains open, the package which is no longer needed is not removed etc.
What solution we should have?
We can have some voting system by which packagers gets motivated to keep the app up to date. This will help the app to be sorted by popular category too. And time has come that we should even start grouping the apps according to there usability eg. multimedia,social network,administration, etc. For being in the official list, there should be testing branch and new commits should be pushed to testing and maybe this testing branch can be available to users for testing too. App level should a good way to define the confidence on the app. The apps which are on level 7 for quite some time can be be official after approval the Official group. The only question is what if the apps level falls? Maybe a day in month should be reversed where only issue related to bringing the app level up should be discussed or hinting the issues relating to lower level of the app.
There is need to show non technical users with intermediate skills on how easy packaging is with video and with documentation having detailed steps for helpers.


I support this in general - though of course there can be many things to discuss to properly define this :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

I think the word we are looking for is “featured apps” (Given special prominence, attention, or publicity). To me such an app would show :

  • quality : be level 7 and be up-to-date with packaging practices (ideally, the app should have been level 7 for a few months already)
  • sustainable / suitable for mid~long term : i.e. actively maintained in the last few months (and ideally have indications that there will be support for it in the coming months and ideally years) ;
  • interesting : it provides significantly interesting features (“killer features”), and/or is likely to be used by many people (in opposition to some apps which are only for niche use-case, or are “just for fun”, like 20euros and 243 …) ;