scripting proposal draft 3

[Ian Monroe]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 1:26 AM, Mark Kretschmann <kretschmann at kde.org> wrote:
>  Apart from possible sandboxing like explained above, we will simply
>  rely on the public auditing in the open source way, like we did with
>  Amarok 1. That is, we rely on the fact that malicious scripts usually
>  get removed rather quickly from kde-apps.org. So far there hasn't been
>  any known malicious script attacks.
>
>  As for auditing done by Amarok developers, that's completely out of
>  the question. I wouldn't take responsibility for the safety of a
>  script in any way, and also I'm lacking the time. The same is probably
>  true for the other devs.

I think we should transition to a system where all Amarok Scripts that
want to be distributed by us have to use a SVN repo. The SVN repo
would follow the same policies as the normal KDE repo (perhaps it
might even be in the KDE repo). Which is to say, it would be very
open. GHNS will be able to create tarballs out of SVN tags.

This would naturally introduce more scrutiny, so it would probably be
helpful for security. But the intention is more to make sure that
available scripts are of a high quality and don't turn into
abandonware.

Ian