About Community and Official Apps

[kanhu]

@Maniack_Crudelis

About your apps, if you agree with the requirements (guess so), and even if nothing’s done for now, could you please open a pull request on my branch, https://github.com/YunoHost/apps/tree/some_featured_apps, so we’ll examine your apps.

You have already added my apps in featured.

[Maniack_Crudelis]

@kanhu

I wanted to know if people see the app level, app group like official, community, featured(proposed) before installing the apps?

Hum, yes they can see that before installing any apps, and for this new feature I made a PR to integrate this information into the app list.
But should I understand that you want to create a poll to know on what our users relate to ?

@kanhu

You have already added my apps in featured.

Oh ok, that’s perfect then.

[kanhu]

@Maniack_Crudelis

But should I understand that you want to create a poll to know on what our users relate to ?

Yes, it would nice to know that.

[Maniack_Crudelis]

Feel free to do it on the forum

[Aleks]

Sooo, reviving the discussion. I think so far it’s not 100% clear what the purpose of featured apps are

@Maniack_Crudelis

Here my ideas about the criteria to accept an app in this list, and also to keep it in it.

• Should already be in the community list.
• Should be keep up to date, regarding the upstream source. If it’s possible with our current YunoHost version.
• The package itself should be up to date regarding the packaging recommendations and helpers.
• Being level 7, at least.
• The repository need testing and master branches, at least. The list should point to HEAD, so the list stays up to date.
• Any modification should be done to the testing branch, and wait at least for one approval for one member of the Apps group. So that we can ensure that there’s nothing in opposition to those criteria. Nor any changes that would harm the server.

Here I mainly see criteria related to quality, good practices and mid-term active maintainenance of the app. That sounds more to me like a “Level 8” (which would be nice to have and following those criteria indeed).

But I think my initial idea of “featured apps” was also apps that relates to :

• accessibility : the quality and accessiblity of the upstream app itself ;
• meaningful : the fact that there is an existing high demand / interest for this app … or that it is accessible and is an answer to a “typical need”, yet people don’t know this app yet ;
• technical trustability : the fact that the quality/integration is good (at least level 7) (c.f. list of criteria from Maniack) ;
• ethics and spirit ? : which apps we, as a project, want to promote / recommend, e.g. license, reliance on evil 3rd parties, does the packaging fit the spirit of YunoHost, … ;

For now, apart from the quality criteria which can be defined objectively, at lot of this is are of course subjective …

In terms of what we actually do with this featured app category, I think it could act as a “default category” or “default filter” when one enters the app store. So instead of having a huge list of 100+ apps (which is impressive, granted), you would see the list of featured apps. And then you can browse “all” or specific categories like “email tools” or “collaborative tools” and whatever … But the point is that you wouldn’t be overwhelmed by so many different apps, some of them corresponding to ~small usecases ? Instead, you could immediately browse 10~30 well-known, high-quality, “sexy”/accessible apps in which many users are likely to be interested.

So for instance I think (again, that’s subjective so to be discussed) :

• Nextcloud is to me the most obvious app which should be flagged as featured
• Etherpad and Rainloop as well for instance ?
• e.g. Discourse and Keeweb, if they do work well and fits the quality criteria ? (I realize I don’t know so many apps)
• Apps like 20euros or Hextris are definitely not to be “featured”, I think, despite they possible quality
• GlowingBear is level 7 and quite stable, yet its packaging doesn’t fit the spirit of YunoHost as you need to install weechat manually …
• Kanboard is level 7 and official, but I would really not recommend it because of its bleeding-eyes UI … (though I guess some people might find it useful, but it’s not really accessible)
• But for instance Wekan would be a good candidate for featured apps, if it did fit the other quality criteria

So idk, that’s my random thoughts. That also raise questions like how to decide collectively about those …

[Maniack_Crudelis]

I redefine criteria in my pull request https://github.com/YunoHost/apps/pull/677/files#diff-04c6e90faac2675aa89e2176d2eec7d8R73.
Still they’re mostly about objective quality and quite the same.

Adding subjective criteria as you defined them could indeed be a good idea. But they would be clearly defined, maybe by asking questions in a small survey.
Which do not change that it’ll be totally subjective.

Considering code quality only, as the level above 7 aren’t used. We could consider rethinking those levels to maybe match that criterion. As a not automatic level of course.