Adopting AppData in KDE?

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Saturday, November 2, 2013 14:35:10 Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> > OCS is, generally, horribly designed. I am even hesitant to use the word
> > ‘design’ in combination with OCS. It is really that bad, and why we did
> > not
> > use it for Bodega.
> 
> I agree with that, and this is the reason why I currently question the
> use of OCS for AppStream. This still needs to be discussed with the
> others, but I would rather like to use an improved OCS or a completely
> new API for the AppStream Ratings&Review features (as well for maybe
> payments, but that's a different issue).

That’s a challenge I see with the AppStream design when it comes to being 
useful as a true ‘app store’ (let alone any other kind of store): the 95% of 
the support needed to make such a thing is missing.

AppStream is good for its intended use case imho, don’t get me wrong; I just 
don’t think the use case is very interesting in the larger context. It’s a 
solution very focused on the needs of Linux distributions (and it does that 
well!), but that’s not really what people want, need or expect from a system 
these days.

So as a better package manager viewer, I think AppStream is fantastic. I do 
think something like Bodega would be a lot more relevant to the modern day use 
cases, though.

What I see as truly invaluable in AppStream is standardizing the metadata for 
Free software applications. It is something Bodega will undoubtedly benefit 
from as well.

> > AppStream is very focused on the needs of desktop Linux. There is
> > *nothing*
> > wrong about that in the least, but it leaves mobile, embedded and server
> > use cases (not to mention more general web based ones) unserviced.
> 
> Can you please clarify what AppStream is missing for mobile?

Ignoring the lack of UI (that’s fixable): non-repository  based listings and 
installation, anything that isn’t an application.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo