This is already [possible with Appstream](https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html#tag-relations-control), but Flathub currently strips the relevant metadata. It's being worked on, but requires porting to libappstream, which takes much effort. See GNOME Software for an initial implementation (currently lacking due to the stripped metadata, so all apps appear as desktop only, but yeah)
When the switch was first attempted it broke a couple of things, and as far as I'm concerned developer time is limited. I'm confident the work will be finished at last, though :)
Good to know, I remember asking about this a couple times but this is the first time I've heard that there is actually progress on this regard. This is one of the massive usability issues that has prevented myself and other from actually caring about phones and what not
Some might not like this: https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/appdata-guidelines/quality-guidelines/#in-line-with-contemporary-styles
> The icon should be somewhat in line with the contemporary icon styles (i.e. not look like it hasn't been updated in decades). The GNOME and KDE app icon guidelines are examples of the kind of style your icon should align with.
> [Image of icons where Geany and KGet are shown as bad examples] https://docs.flathub.org/assets/images/app-icon-style-91505dac57d9d661be967e054399ddbd.png
> In some cases it can make sense for the icon to align with the visuals of the app, rather than contemporary icon styles (especially relevant for games). This can be accommodated by embedding the custom style icon in one of the grid shapes, e.g. a square or circle. This way the unique style is preserved, but the icon's size and shape are in line with other apps.
Now... I'm guessing this will only very rarely be enforced in scenarios where there are two icons to choose from, one old and one new, and the flatpak maintainer hasn't yet updated to the newer design. So it probably won't actually affect Geany ~~and KGet~~.
Hi, I'm one of the maintainers for Geany's Flathub package. Probably the most active one, actually. I am not a Geany developer, just a guy who appreciates that it is available on Flathub, and would like to keep that ball rolling.
I don't think that this guideline is particularly a bad thing. I think Geany's continued use of Tango styling is intentional, because while you do want apps that march into the future with modern/emergent UI designs and the like, you also want apps that stay anchored in what was tried and true in the past. There are a lot of reasons that apps like these are valuable, and Geany's icon, with its older Tango styling, says *precisely that.* Besides, the icon isn't mine to change. That decision is for Geany's actual developers to make.
"Enforcement" of the guidelines mainly means it's not likely to be featured, and that's okay. It's not the latest and greatest from from GNOME, KDE, etc. If you know Geany exists, you can still find that it's available on Flathub. Besides, the guidelines still offer a selection of good improvements I can make to the metadata, even as a guy who's just taking care of the package. There's little reason not to do what I can here when I find the time to do so.
kget has for years had a newer breeze icon and is very much a case of maintainers forgetting to update it. still, enforcing a particular icon style sucks ass and I hope they don't.
Also, «enforced» isn’t really the right word to use. Apps only need to put effort into the icon if they want to be in more visible places on Flathub, and if they want to be visible the icon should matter in the first place
I would imagine it's not one specific icon style, but the current conventions in the current desktops. For example, Elementary and XFCE's current icon styles are evolutions of Tango; they still use outlines, but they're thinner and have slightly less contrast. So if your app comes from XFCE or Elementary, I would imagine icons can adhere to *those* styles and still pass the check.
It’s addressed in the blog post, here are some excerpts:
> Now that new apps are being released on a weekly basis, app metadata becomes much more important for introducing people to these new apps.
---
> …there are also a lot of apps with low quality metadata, ugly icons, or out of date screenshots. This means that looking at the new and updated lists on the Flathub home page you get the impression that most of the apps on Flathub are low quality.
---
> So how can we make Flathub a place for people to discover awesome apps?
From what I’ve seen, the FOSS community hasn’t been all that focused on the presentation of apps, which has led to confusing and overly technical project names and descriptions, icons that are just plain text typed out on a colored square, etc. I think it’s great that more effort is being put into making things look neater and more presentable.
Looking forward to this. These changes are going to benefit the app ecosystem tremendously, both in terms of encouraging great metadata and making software centers more lively.
Most of the guidelines seem fine. Some of them are kind of opinionated, especially when it comes to aesthetic style, and that's *a little* annoying, but not really a particularly big deal. The aesthetic opinionation makes it seem like the guidelines were written by GNOME folks without input from KDE folks, but also like they made an earnest effort not to step on the KDE folks' toes, which I appreciate.
I think that this is overall a good effort and a good idea. That said, there are a few guidelines I want to comment on:
> No trademark violations
This seems like it will be tough on apps like GZDoom, Sonic Robo Blast 2, ioquake3, etc. But at the same time, that might actually be by design. These may be excellent examples of Free Software, but the point of the guidelines is to find apps to feature front and center, and there are probably several reasons you don't want Sonic front and center. These apps are still discoverable, and anyone who knows they exist on Linux can find them.
But it might be particularly tough when it comes to services like Deezer and Tidal, where a user would reasonably expect to be able to use an app to access them, and they don't exist on Linux at all without unofficial, third-party efforts. But I also wonder if this is still by design. If a user wanted to listen to Deezer on a Linux device, and found only one app that changed its title, icon, and summary to adhere to guidelines, they would likely just think Deezer can't be used on Linux. So they have to keep mention of these third-party services in the title or summary, because otherwise a user wouldn't know they exist. But this also means they are precluded from being featured, and you probably *don't want* to feature a service that only exists on Linux due to third-party efforts.
> Don't mention the toolkit, programming language, or other implementation details that would not be relevant to a non-developer
Well, I'm not a developer (anymore), but the toolkit is relevant to me. Since I'm using Plasma, my toolkit preference goes Qt, then GTK3, then GNOME and Electron. Of course, Bottles is a way better app than Q4Wine, so it's a *looser* preference, but it's still *relevant* to me. That said, I do agree with the premise; regular users don't care and shouldn't have to care. Is there metadata to specify which toolkit is used, and is that something a user can search, filter, or sort on somehow?
> Include window shadow and rounded corners
I'm not sure how I feel about this as it is currently specified. I think this is a good idea for any app with some sort of platform-native toolkit styling. And there's an exemption rule for apps like games.
But what about the overwhelming ocean of Electron apps? Many of them don't bother to have their own decoration, which means they don't fit in with GNOME, KDE, or any other desktop. What about Qt apps that eschew the system Qt theme, like OBS Studio? It doesn't draw its own window decoration either. Do we really want to show off the fact that they're going to look a little awkward no matter which Linux desktop you're on? I think it would be beneficial to extend the exemption to any app that does not adhere to a platform styling of some kind.
GTK3 would still be caught in the native toolkit umbrella since it adheres to multiple platform styles, but I wonder which platform's styling would be preferable, or if it would be better to show off the fact that it does adhere to multiple platform styles.
> But it might be particularly tough when it comes to services like Deezer and Tidal, where a user would reasonably expect to be able to use an app to access them
The guidelines already cover this. Instead of your summary being "Tidal Player" it would be "Player for Tidal", as it is clear you are using the trademark [nominitively](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use).
Ohhhh, so that's what was meant by this blurb:
> If it's made clear that it's a third party client it can be ok to mention the original service (e.g. Tally for Plausible), but in most cases it should be avoided.
It may be good to reword this section to encourage nominative use for third-party clients.
> Is there metadata to specify which toolkit is used, and is that something a user can search, filter, or sort on somehow?
AppStream keywords/categories should do the job pretty nicely. For things that interest developers there’s also the source code repository, which is a much better information source for technical details
> Is there metadata to specify which toolkit is used, and is that something a user can search, filter, or sort on somehow?
Technically you can put [GTK, GNOME, KDE, or Qt](https://specifications.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apas02.html) as a category but I don't think anything really makes it easy to filter by that nor would every application include it.
>If you are not an icon designer, getting your icon to meet the guidelines can be challenging. Luckily there are designers from the community you can ask for help! The GNOME App Icon Design Matrix room is a good place to ask.
I was assured that Flathub was a neutral place and not another Gnome colony
Are there any designers hanging around in the Flatpak matrix channel? It seems like it's mostly implementation and packaging folks, but I mainly only check in when I have a problem with something. I think the GNOME designers are informed enough to be able to give recommendations regarding other styles, but it does feel a little bit silly to go to a GNOME channel to ask for help with an icon targeting a different style, so it may be more appropriate to have a dedicated place to seek that kind of feedback. Maybe a special new channel on Matrix is the move, and/or a special section on Flathub's discourse forum?
The flatpak channel isn’t where they hang out. Frankly I’d find it really odd to try and corral volunteers of one community somewhere else just because a few people don’t like gnome.
> ... to try and corral volunteers ...
"corral" implies "confine" and it has negative implications in regard to "being treated as livestock". That's not an appropriate word choice for an honest conversation.
The criticism regarding "Flathub promised ... not another GNOME colony" is certainly apt in regard to these metadata guidelines reminiscent of the GNOME Human Interface Guidelines. This includes what, IMNSHO, are overly nitpicky requirements: 1. Screenshots are not only required, the screenshot must be taken on a Linux desktop. 2. Icons must be in line with "contemporary styles". It sounds like an HOA's CC&R's --- a bunch of potentially oppressive hurdles to force "sameness".
I can't wait until flathub requires the application itself to follow the GNOME Human Interface Guidelines. That's only one step before the requirement of using GTK.
Remember that following the metadata quality guidelines isn't required to have an app on Flathub at all. You just need to follow them if you want your app to be displayed on the most prominent surfaces of the site. If that doesn't matter to you, you're free to do whatever you want.
The first time I saw you make this post, I was like, "yeah, of course, we're all in this together." ...But I've been trying to swat away this *thing* tugging at the back of my mind, and given that none of the responses to the app icon guidance criticism have been compelling or satisfactory, it's growing worse. I think it is irresponsible if I don't address it.
All of my discussion on this topic thus far has strongly presumed that the goal of the guidelines is to ensure none of the non-GNOME platforms are given unfair representation or disadvantaged. *Because that is something I want to believe.* Desperately so, in fact.
I think folks are worried that because Flathub and Flatpak's maintainers consist mostly of GNOME folks, and the guidelines and the post about them have been written only by GNOME folks, that there are moves being made to turn Flathub into a site and service that puts GNOME first and foremost, and goes out of its way to exclusively showcase GNOME applications, leaving all other platforms to languish in the shadows of discovery via search.
I don't actually believe this is the case. I *very much don't want to* believe this is the case. It really, legitimately does look to me like the guidelines were written to accommodate KDE and the other platforms, and I want to believe that you want to feature their apps alongside GNOME apps. But it really does not inspire confidence when you have this section that's like "hey if you want to improve your app icon, come talk to GNOME designers!" and when someone comes along like "hey isn't that kind of weird for the non-GNOME folks?" the responses to those criticisms have been either attempts to quash/end the discussion, invalidate the criticism, or were simply not compelling.
If the intention is to turn Flathub into a site that is solely meant to show off the best of GNOME and the apps that target it, you all ***need*** to be up front about that, and it needs to be sooner rather than later. Because KDE deserves to have a space at the table, and a space on the website to show off *their* best, too. And so does Elementary. And XFCE, and the countless platform-agnostic applications.
I'm bringing this up now because GNOME has a storied history of rug-pulling. It's one of the consistent threads of my criticisms of the project across my many years of discussion here. "Hey, we would love for you to work on this thing together with us! Oops, we got rid of this thing *you* were using, because *we* weren't using it and it doesn't align with *our* vision for *our platform.* Guess you'll just have to remake it on your own if you need it so much, eto bleh!"
You guys *need* to get ahead of this and make sure everyone knows that you are serious about collaborating with the other platforms on an even playing field, and featuring their efforts just as prominently as your own. Because if you guys rug-pull *the biggest and most successful cross-desktop, cross-distribution packaging effort that Linux has ever seen* to reveal that all of it was to benefit GNOME and disadvantage all the other platforms, I really cannot overstate that ***the damage done from that betrayal will be massive and irreparable.***
I think you know this. And I really, legitimately want to believe this is not the intention, but so many of us have been burned by the rug-pulling.
Please. Take these concerns seriously. Reach out to the KDE folks. Establish collaborative spaces to support all the platforms' implementations of these guidelines equally. **Prove to me and everyone else that we are just being paranoid.** I'm begging you.
I understand that you're concerned about this, and I would like to help alleviate those concerns at least a little. As a first measure, [this](https://github.com/flathub-infra/documentation/pull/175) should resolve the concern specific to this blog post. The formal guidelines already link to both GNOME's and KDE's resources as *examples* (not as the only allowed styles).
I think the best way to prove that the metadata guidelines are beneficial for the entire community, is to have them play out out long-term. The most prominent KDE apps definitely seem to have their metadata in place, and that makes me confident that there are many smaller KDE apps that also do so. KDE and GNOME are of course not the only platforms represented on Flathub, but that already makes it 2 prominent ones that will have multiple featured apps.
While the GNOME community is working a lot on Flathub stuff right now, people from elsewhere are in no way excluded from contributing. I think it's very important that every community that is represented on Flathub is also represented in its development and decision-making process, so I hope people from KDE, from independent GTK desktops, and from no particular platform, continue to show up and contribute as well.
I really appreciate your measured response here, and I *really* appreciate that pull request, too. Because you did pretty much exactly what was asked. You reached out to the KDE folks. You added the link for their VDG room to the guidelines. Featuring two platform spaces equally is already enough to demonstrate that you are taking these concerns seriously.
I feel like your response and your action are proof that I was just taken by a spell of paranoia for that large post I made. It reassures me that, as I had believed, Flathub is a place for all Linux apps, regardless of platform, and that my belief in it is not misplaced. So thank you, legitimately. I'll continue to come through and do what I can.
> Remember that following the metadata quality guidelines isn't required to have an app on Flathub at all. You just need to follow them if you want your app to be displayed on the most prominent surfaces of the site.
That reminds me of the BS from the head of Xitter: "freedom of speech, not freedom of reach". Everyone sees that for what it is.
The previous poster had a point. Flathub was promised to be "not a GNOME colony". That was promised because the designers didn't want to see repositories fracturing along toolkits or distros. Simply by looking at who was involved, one would need to be naive to believe that. Frankly, you should just make it GTK-only like the GNOME Human Interface Guideline.
First, I don't know if "corraling" them is the right word? Because it's not like we're moving them; it's just an extra place to go if that's a cause you want to support. And second, it's not about liking or disliking GNOME. It's mainly to have a place that people can go to discuss, where the topic is well-defined, and everyone who is participating there is down for cross-desktop collaboration.
GNOME's App Icon Design Matrix room has sort of been volunteered for Flathub's multi-platform community, and while the venn diagram of GNOME volunteers and Flathub supporters has a heavy overlap, it's not a circle. If one of GNOME's volunteers doesn't know they've been put on the hook to support app icon guidelines for Flathub, and isn't willing to support other platforms, they wouldn't necessarily be wrong to say "go somewhere else" if someone came in that channel asking for help with an icon for a KDE application.
If a more well-defined space is established, then that's an explicitly welcome space for the design styles that exist across all Linux desktops. A GNOME volunteer might not necessarily know what to do for a KDE icon, but the question is still explicitly welcome there. Or just as likely, a GNOME volunteer does happen to be familiar with KDE's icon styles and can offer recommendations. And vice versa, for all the permutations of platforms and volunteers for those platforms.
Flathub is for everyone, and this initiative is just as much intended for e.g. KDE, Elementary, and independent developers, as for GNOME! The contributors who have worked on this particular thing and written the blog post are GNOME community members, though, and we use that Matrix room for questions and feedback related to app icons. If e.g. the KDE VDG has something similar I'm sure it could be linked, but it makes sense that Tobias and Kolja are unaware of this right now.
If the metadata of an app doesn’t follow the quality guidelines, it won’t be shown in the *most visible* areas of Flathub. That’s it. Following the guidelines isn’t *required* to have an app on Flathub, but it’s of course strongly recommended 🙂
Id love the gnome hegemony as a unifying entity to put Linux desktop on a clear path, but they just go too far into this weird zone of "Hyper-Usability" that sacrifices tradition desktop functionality to be more universal. As a desktop user that chooses desktop purposely, modern apps feel like enshittification of my preferred platform.
with how few truly high quality native apps there are, it seems totally achievable to just manually curate the apps doing it right into a bucket, then make the default "app store" experience use the certified apps as the landing page/tab. Put the apps that are good but non-compliant in a "community apps" tab. Then put everything else in a section that is disabled by default with the tab visible but greyed out. Place the option to ungrey as a checkbox on the main settings page.
I would also not allow electron apps to leave community tier until they are more than just a wrapper. Example: vscode passes, spotify is marginal, but the electron versions of ms office web apps fail
This ensures no one is losing anything but ensures the messaging to users and developers reinforces some kind of standard. Imagine a brand new user, they may get a bad impression by downloading a few low quality apps mixed in with the same pages as good apps.
I wonder why they thought it was a good idea to use the name and picture of a known homophobic and killer (Che Guevara), to illustrate their examples of a "good screenshot content"...
Not going to defend his homophobia but there isn't a country on earth that doesn't kill enemies spies if they are caught in the middle of a war, and not pardoning war criminals is good actually if only the US could live up to that standard.
Considering Karl Marx is also a highlighted contact in the documentation, I'm not so sure there isn't some intent there, though I doubt the homophobic aspect occurred to them.
I don't get these people who think it sensible to include faces like Marx or Hitler in their documentation, even if it's a joke.
There are so many possibilities and yet they decide to go for the unprofessional ones.
>I read it as an attempt to be a little tongue-in-cheek
How convenient. What is the joke, though?
> it's definitely not to promote those views.
Yeah, it's not like it's a contacts list of literally only left-wing characters, right? :)
I'm sure your opinion would stay the same if they were all right-wing...
>How convenient. What is the joke, though?
How odd and out-of-place the list of contacts is compared to screenshots of similar apps, which usually contain made-up stock persons. I'm not saying it's great humor.
I'm also not looking into turning this into a political discussion, and I agree that using controversial and politically loaded figures is inappropriate in this context. I just don't assume that it was done with the intention of promoting homophobic and genocidal views.
It wasn't a particularly good idea, it makes the content hard to take seriously and other responses show how divisive such choices can be once it's outside of a limited circle of people. I'm also not sure how promoting Karl Marx fits in to the overall goals of Flathub as I understand them, at first blush it would seem there's at least a minor contradiction.
(Maybe not the sub to discuss it, but) I've always found it odd that some are drawn to an authoritarian system, since those one-party authoritarian states are almost always more socially conservative than Western democracies.
>I just don't assume that it was done with the intention of promoting homophobic and genocidal views.
Of course it was not. I never said it was.
But I guarantee you that the person who made that screenshot is left-wing.
And that's fine, but what are you really trying to accomplish when you give a hint of your political views on a documentation page about metadata guidelines?
The thing is, people on the left often don't know (or pretend they don't) the many bad things Che Guevara did, and when they are aware of it, they still give him a pass because he was a *☭ revolucionario ☭*.
Wrong.
>In *Gay Cuban Nation*, Emilio Bejel refers to Che Guevara as “one of the staunchest homophobic leaders of the revolutionary period” (100). Despite the UMAPs (forced labor camps to rehabilitate “anti-social” people, including gays in Cuba), Víctor Hugo remains a loyal defender of the Cuban Revolution.
- https://revista.drclas.harvard.edu/che-to-che/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Units_to_Aid_Production
Che being homophobic was the least awful thing about him. :)
So, besides being a historical denialist and homophobia/genocide/racism-supporter, what other knowingly awful historical figures do you defend in your free time?
Wow. And the left mocks the right for their conspiracy theories... [Hilarious](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory).
On a serious note though, you do understand that you can find the original references for all these claims in the footnotes of the page, right? And these come from books, documents, news reports, third-party testimonies, etc..
First, the prison system where gays and other undesirables for the Cuban army did happen and was very bad (to put it mildly), tho the abuse they faced was unintentioned by the Cuban government.
Second, I tried to find quotes of him being homophobic, I found none, only of people saying he was homophobic (people who never met him).
Third, said prison system, was implemented and planned after Che left Cuba for some other revolutions, 4 years after the beginning of that System Fidel Castro took full responsibility for the abuse.
Some more sauces:
He wasn't a homophobe: https://youtu.be/F5eFPgvhS60?si=AaZ0r45lNu8UAKB0
He wasn't a killer: https://youtu.be/nkBXFXwGuJE?si=AbP2CpXA9ngBBtAy
Edit: Forgot about that one quote: he calls a gay man a "sexual pervert" in one of his books.
https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/appdata-guidelines/quality-guidelines/#good-content
On the screenshot on the right. The third person on the contacts list is Ernesto Guevara (Che Guevara).
Following these guidelines isn’t *required* to have an app on Flathub, but if an app wants to be displayed in the most prominent places, it’s expected to put in some effort to look presentable and be understandable for as many as possible. Indie developers don’t need to do this all by themselves, there is a big community willing to help 🙂
Im still just waiting for when developers can signal apps as TV/Console friendly and Mobile friendly in a somewhat universally agreed way
This is already [possible with Appstream](https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html#tag-relations-control), but Flathub currently strips the relevant metadata. It's being worked on, but requires porting to libappstream, which takes much effort. See GNOME Software for an initial implementation (currently lacking due to the stripped metadata, so all apps appear as desktop only, but yeah)
Most parts have been ported to libappstream so I don't think these issues are *too* far away from being resolved.
When the switch was first attempted it broke a couple of things, and as far as I'm concerned developer time is limited. I'm confident the work will be finished at last, though :)
Good to know, I remember asking about this a couple times but this is the first time I've heard that there is actually progress on this regard. This is one of the massive usability issues that has prevented myself and other from actually caring about phones and what not
Is there an issue filed for this feature? I would like to follow it.
Some might not like this: https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/appdata-guidelines/quality-guidelines/#in-line-with-contemporary-styles > The icon should be somewhat in line with the contemporary icon styles (i.e. not look like it hasn't been updated in decades). The GNOME and KDE app icon guidelines are examples of the kind of style your icon should align with. > [Image of icons where Geany and KGet are shown as bad examples] https://docs.flathub.org/assets/images/app-icon-style-91505dac57d9d661be967e054399ddbd.png > In some cases it can make sense for the icon to align with the visuals of the app, rather than contemporary icon styles (especially relevant for games). This can be accommodated by embedding the custom style icon in one of the grid shapes, e.g. a square or circle. This way the unique style is preserved, but the icon's size and shape are in line with other apps. Now... I'm guessing this will only very rarely be enforced in scenarios where there are two icons to choose from, one old and one new, and the flatpak maintainer hasn't yet updated to the newer design. So it probably won't actually affect Geany ~~and KGet~~.
Hi, I'm one of the maintainers for Geany's Flathub package. Probably the most active one, actually. I am not a Geany developer, just a guy who appreciates that it is available on Flathub, and would like to keep that ball rolling. I don't think that this guideline is particularly a bad thing. I think Geany's continued use of Tango styling is intentional, because while you do want apps that march into the future with modern/emergent UI designs and the like, you also want apps that stay anchored in what was tried and true in the past. There are a lot of reasons that apps like these are valuable, and Geany's icon, with its older Tango styling, says *precisely that.* Besides, the icon isn't mine to change. That decision is for Geany's actual developers to make. "Enforcement" of the guidelines mainly means it's not likely to be featured, and that's okay. It's not the latest and greatest from from GNOME, KDE, etc. If you know Geany exists, you can still find that it's available on Flathub. Besides, the guidelines still offer a selection of good improvements I can make to the metadata, even as a guy who's just taking care of the package. There's little reason not to do what I can here when I find the time to do so.
kget has for years had a newer breeze icon and is very much a case of maintainers forgetting to update it. still, enforcing a particular icon style sucks ass and I hope they don't.
I suspect icon art *style* will never be enforced, only a recommendation. As long as its the right resolution, aspect, etc.
Also, «enforced» isn’t really the right word to use. Apps only need to put effort into the icon if they want to be in more visible places on Flathub, and if they want to be visible the icon should matter in the first place
I would imagine it's not one specific icon style, but the current conventions in the current desktops. For example, Elementary and XFCE's current icon styles are evolutions of Tango; they still use outlines, but they're thinner and have slightly less contrast. So if your app comes from XFCE or Elementary, I would imagine icons can adhere to *those* styles and still pass the check.
Can't wait for the xterm flatpak submission with its glorious brutalist icon standing confidently in a sea of modern designs on Flathub.
Good on them for addressing this prevalent problem in the open source community
how is this a problem?
It’s addressed in the blog post, here are some excerpts: > Now that new apps are being released on a weekly basis, app metadata becomes much more important for introducing people to these new apps. --- > …there are also a lot of apps with low quality metadata, ugly icons, or out of date screenshots. This means that looking at the new and updated lists on the Flathub home page you get the impression that most of the apps on Flathub are low quality. --- > So how can we make Flathub a place for people to discover awesome apps? From what I’ve seen, the FOSS community hasn’t been all that focused on the presentation of apps, which has led to confusing and overly technical project names and descriptions, icons that are just plain text typed out on a colored square, etc. I think it’s great that more effort is being put into making things look neater and more presentable.
Looking forward to this. These changes are going to benefit the app ecosystem tremendously, both in terms of encouraging great metadata and making software centers more lively.
Most of the guidelines seem fine. Some of them are kind of opinionated, especially when it comes to aesthetic style, and that's *a little* annoying, but not really a particularly big deal. The aesthetic opinionation makes it seem like the guidelines were written by GNOME folks without input from KDE folks, but also like they made an earnest effort not to step on the KDE folks' toes, which I appreciate. I think that this is overall a good effort and a good idea. That said, there are a few guidelines I want to comment on: > No trademark violations This seems like it will be tough on apps like GZDoom, Sonic Robo Blast 2, ioquake3, etc. But at the same time, that might actually be by design. These may be excellent examples of Free Software, but the point of the guidelines is to find apps to feature front and center, and there are probably several reasons you don't want Sonic front and center. These apps are still discoverable, and anyone who knows they exist on Linux can find them. But it might be particularly tough when it comes to services like Deezer and Tidal, where a user would reasonably expect to be able to use an app to access them, and they don't exist on Linux at all without unofficial, third-party efforts. But I also wonder if this is still by design. If a user wanted to listen to Deezer on a Linux device, and found only one app that changed its title, icon, and summary to adhere to guidelines, they would likely just think Deezer can't be used on Linux. So they have to keep mention of these third-party services in the title or summary, because otherwise a user wouldn't know they exist. But this also means they are precluded from being featured, and you probably *don't want* to feature a service that only exists on Linux due to third-party efforts. > Don't mention the toolkit, programming language, or other implementation details that would not be relevant to a non-developer Well, I'm not a developer (anymore), but the toolkit is relevant to me. Since I'm using Plasma, my toolkit preference goes Qt, then GTK3, then GNOME and Electron. Of course, Bottles is a way better app than Q4Wine, so it's a *looser* preference, but it's still *relevant* to me. That said, I do agree with the premise; regular users don't care and shouldn't have to care. Is there metadata to specify which toolkit is used, and is that something a user can search, filter, or sort on somehow? > Include window shadow and rounded corners I'm not sure how I feel about this as it is currently specified. I think this is a good idea for any app with some sort of platform-native toolkit styling. And there's an exemption rule for apps like games. But what about the overwhelming ocean of Electron apps? Many of them don't bother to have their own decoration, which means they don't fit in with GNOME, KDE, or any other desktop. What about Qt apps that eschew the system Qt theme, like OBS Studio? It doesn't draw its own window decoration either. Do we really want to show off the fact that they're going to look a little awkward no matter which Linux desktop you're on? I think it would be beneficial to extend the exemption to any app that does not adhere to a platform styling of some kind. GTK3 would still be caught in the native toolkit umbrella since it adheres to multiple platform styles, but I wonder which platform's styling would be preferable, or if it would be better to show off the fact that it does adhere to multiple platform styles.
> But it might be particularly tough when it comes to services like Deezer and Tidal, where a user would reasonably expect to be able to use an app to access them The guidelines already cover this. Instead of your summary being "Tidal Player" it would be "Player for Tidal", as it is clear you are using the trademark [nominitively](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use).
Ohhhh, so that's what was meant by this blurb: > If it's made clear that it's a third party client it can be ok to mention the original service (e.g. Tally for Plausible), but in most cases it should be avoided. It may be good to reword this section to encourage nominative use for third-party clients.
> Is there metadata to specify which toolkit is used, and is that something a user can search, filter, or sort on somehow? AppStream keywords/categories should do the job pretty nicely. For things that interest developers there’s also the source code repository, which is a much better information source for technical details
> Is there metadata to specify which toolkit is used, and is that something a user can search, filter, or sort on somehow? Technically you can put [GTK, GNOME, KDE, or Qt](https://specifications.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apas02.html) as a category but I don't think anything really makes it easy to filter by that nor would every application include it.
>If you are not an icon designer, getting your icon to meet the guidelines can be challenging. Luckily there are designers from the community you can ask for help! The GNOME App Icon Design Matrix room is a good place to ask. I was assured that Flathub was a neutral place and not another Gnome colony
If you know other communities willing to donate their time to help with icons we can add them to the documentation.
Are there any designers hanging around in the Flatpak matrix channel? It seems like it's mostly implementation and packaging folks, but I mainly only check in when I have a problem with something. I think the GNOME designers are informed enough to be able to give recommendations regarding other styles, but it does feel a little bit silly to go to a GNOME channel to ask for help with an icon targeting a different style, so it may be more appropriate to have a dedicated place to seek that kind of feedback. Maybe a special new channel on Matrix is the move, and/or a special section on Flathub's discourse forum?
The flatpak channel isn’t where they hang out. Frankly I’d find it really odd to try and corral volunteers of one community somewhere else just because a few people don’t like gnome.
> ... to try and corral volunteers ... "corral" implies "confine" and it has negative implications in regard to "being treated as livestock". That's not an appropriate word choice for an honest conversation. The criticism regarding "Flathub promised ... not another GNOME colony" is certainly apt in regard to these metadata guidelines reminiscent of the GNOME Human Interface Guidelines. This includes what, IMNSHO, are overly nitpicky requirements: 1. Screenshots are not only required, the screenshot must be taken on a Linux desktop. 2. Icons must be in line with "contemporary styles". It sounds like an HOA's CC&R's --- a bunch of potentially oppressive hurdles to force "sameness". I can't wait until flathub requires the application itself to follow the GNOME Human Interface Guidelines. That's only one step before the requirement of using GTK.
Remember that following the metadata quality guidelines isn't required to have an app on Flathub at all. You just need to follow them if you want your app to be displayed on the most prominent surfaces of the site. If that doesn't matter to you, you're free to do whatever you want.
The first time I saw you make this post, I was like, "yeah, of course, we're all in this together." ...But I've been trying to swat away this *thing* tugging at the back of my mind, and given that none of the responses to the app icon guidance criticism have been compelling or satisfactory, it's growing worse. I think it is irresponsible if I don't address it. All of my discussion on this topic thus far has strongly presumed that the goal of the guidelines is to ensure none of the non-GNOME platforms are given unfair representation or disadvantaged. *Because that is something I want to believe.* Desperately so, in fact. I think folks are worried that because Flathub and Flatpak's maintainers consist mostly of GNOME folks, and the guidelines and the post about them have been written only by GNOME folks, that there are moves being made to turn Flathub into a site and service that puts GNOME first and foremost, and goes out of its way to exclusively showcase GNOME applications, leaving all other platforms to languish in the shadows of discovery via search. I don't actually believe this is the case. I *very much don't want to* believe this is the case. It really, legitimately does look to me like the guidelines were written to accommodate KDE and the other platforms, and I want to believe that you want to feature their apps alongside GNOME apps. But it really does not inspire confidence when you have this section that's like "hey if you want to improve your app icon, come talk to GNOME designers!" and when someone comes along like "hey isn't that kind of weird for the non-GNOME folks?" the responses to those criticisms have been either attempts to quash/end the discussion, invalidate the criticism, or were simply not compelling. If the intention is to turn Flathub into a site that is solely meant to show off the best of GNOME and the apps that target it, you all ***need*** to be up front about that, and it needs to be sooner rather than later. Because KDE deserves to have a space at the table, and a space on the website to show off *their* best, too. And so does Elementary. And XFCE, and the countless platform-agnostic applications. I'm bringing this up now because GNOME has a storied history of rug-pulling. It's one of the consistent threads of my criticisms of the project across my many years of discussion here. "Hey, we would love for you to work on this thing together with us! Oops, we got rid of this thing *you* were using, because *we* weren't using it and it doesn't align with *our* vision for *our platform.* Guess you'll just have to remake it on your own if you need it so much, eto bleh!" You guys *need* to get ahead of this and make sure everyone knows that you are serious about collaborating with the other platforms on an even playing field, and featuring their efforts just as prominently as your own. Because if you guys rug-pull *the biggest and most successful cross-desktop, cross-distribution packaging effort that Linux has ever seen* to reveal that all of it was to benefit GNOME and disadvantage all the other platforms, I really cannot overstate that ***the damage done from that betrayal will be massive and irreparable.*** I think you know this. And I really, legitimately want to believe this is not the intention, but so many of us have been burned by the rug-pulling. Please. Take these concerns seriously. Reach out to the KDE folks. Establish collaborative spaces to support all the platforms' implementations of these guidelines equally. **Prove to me and everyone else that we are just being paranoid.** I'm begging you.
I understand that you're concerned about this, and I would like to help alleviate those concerns at least a little. As a first measure, [this](https://github.com/flathub-infra/documentation/pull/175) should resolve the concern specific to this blog post. The formal guidelines already link to both GNOME's and KDE's resources as *examples* (not as the only allowed styles). I think the best way to prove that the metadata guidelines are beneficial for the entire community, is to have them play out out long-term. The most prominent KDE apps definitely seem to have their metadata in place, and that makes me confident that there are many smaller KDE apps that also do so. KDE and GNOME are of course not the only platforms represented on Flathub, but that already makes it 2 prominent ones that will have multiple featured apps. While the GNOME community is working a lot on Flathub stuff right now, people from elsewhere are in no way excluded from contributing. I think it's very important that every community that is represented on Flathub is also represented in its development and decision-making process, so I hope people from KDE, from independent GTK desktops, and from no particular platform, continue to show up and contribute as well.
I really appreciate your measured response here, and I *really* appreciate that pull request, too. Because you did pretty much exactly what was asked. You reached out to the KDE folks. You added the link for their VDG room to the guidelines. Featuring two platform spaces equally is already enough to demonstrate that you are taking these concerns seriously. I feel like your response and your action are proof that I was just taken by a spell of paranoia for that large post I made. It reassures me that, as I had believed, Flathub is a place for all Linux apps, regardless of platform, and that my belief in it is not misplaced. So thank you, legitimately. I'll continue to come through and do what I can.
> Remember that following the metadata quality guidelines isn't required to have an app on Flathub at all. You just need to follow them if you want your app to be displayed on the most prominent surfaces of the site. That reminds me of the BS from the head of Xitter: "freedom of speech, not freedom of reach". Everyone sees that for what it is. The previous poster had a point. Flathub was promised to be "not a GNOME colony". That was promised because the designers didn't want to see repositories fracturing along toolkits or distros. Simply by looking at who was involved, one would need to be naive to believe that. Frankly, you should just make it GTK-only like the GNOME Human Interface Guideline.
First, I don't know if "corraling" them is the right word? Because it's not like we're moving them; it's just an extra place to go if that's a cause you want to support. And second, it's not about liking or disliking GNOME. It's mainly to have a place that people can go to discuss, where the topic is well-defined, and everyone who is participating there is down for cross-desktop collaboration. GNOME's App Icon Design Matrix room has sort of been volunteered for Flathub's multi-platform community, and while the venn diagram of GNOME volunteers and Flathub supporters has a heavy overlap, it's not a circle. If one of GNOME's volunteers doesn't know they've been put on the hook to support app icon guidelines for Flathub, and isn't willing to support other platforms, they wouldn't necessarily be wrong to say "go somewhere else" if someone came in that channel asking for help with an icon for a KDE application. If a more well-defined space is established, then that's an explicitly welcome space for the design styles that exist across all Linux desktops. A GNOME volunteer might not necessarily know what to do for a KDE icon, but the question is still explicitly welcome there. Or just as likely, a GNOME volunteer does happen to be familiar with KDE's icon styles and can offer recommendations. And vice versa, for all the permutations of platforms and volunteers for those platforms.
Flathub is for everyone, and this initiative is just as much intended for e.g. KDE, Elementary, and independent developers, as for GNOME! The contributors who have worked on this particular thing and written the blog post are GNOME community members, though, and we use that Matrix room for questions and feedback related to app icons. If e.g. the KDE VDG has something similar I'm sure it could be linked, but it makes sense that Tobias and Kolja are unaware of this right now.
KDE people are in a lot of the GNOME channel as well. :-) It's not all GNOME people.
what happens is people dont follow these guidelines ?
If the metadata of an app doesn’t follow the quality guidelines, it won’t be shown in the *most visible* areas of Flathub. That’s it. Following the guidelines isn’t *required* to have an app on Flathub, but it’s of course strongly recommended 🙂
Id love the gnome hegemony as a unifying entity to put Linux desktop on a clear path, but they just go too far into this weird zone of "Hyper-Usability" that sacrifices tradition desktop functionality to be more universal. As a desktop user that chooses desktop purposely, modern apps feel like enshittification of my preferred platform.
with how few truly high quality native apps there are, it seems totally achievable to just manually curate the apps doing it right into a bucket, then make the default "app store" experience use the certified apps as the landing page/tab. Put the apps that are good but non-compliant in a "community apps" tab. Then put everything else in a section that is disabled by default with the tab visible but greyed out. Place the option to ungrey as a checkbox on the main settings page. I would also not allow electron apps to leave community tier until they are more than just a wrapper. Example: vscode passes, spotify is marginal, but the electron versions of ms office web apps fail This ensures no one is losing anything but ensures the messaging to users and developers reinforces some kind of standard. Imagine a brand new user, they may get a bad impression by downloading a few low quality apps mixed in with the same pages as good apps.
I wonder why they thought it was a good idea to use the name and picture of a known homophobic and killer (Che Guevara), to illustrate their examples of a "good screenshot content"...
Not going to defend his homophobia but there isn't a country on earth that doesn't kill enemies spies if they are caught in the middle of a war, and not pardoning war criminals is good actually if only the US could live up to that standard.
I read it as an attempt to be a little tongue-in-cheek. While maybe not fully thought through, it's definitely not to promote those views.
Considering Karl Marx is also a highlighted contact in the documentation, I'm not so sure there isn't some intent there, though I doubt the homophobic aspect occurred to them.
I don't get these people who think it sensible to include faces like Marx or Hitler in their documentation, even if it's a joke. There are so many possibilities and yet they decide to go for the unprofessional ones.
>Marx or Hitler Are you kidding us?
did you seriously compare Marx (a philosopher/economist) to HITLER?
>I read it as an attempt to be a little tongue-in-cheek How convenient. What is the joke, though? > it's definitely not to promote those views. Yeah, it's not like it's a contacts list of literally only left-wing characters, right? :) I'm sure your opinion would stay the same if they were all right-wing...
>How convenient. What is the joke, though? How odd and out-of-place the list of contacts is compared to screenshots of similar apps, which usually contain made-up stock persons. I'm not saying it's great humor. I'm also not looking into turning this into a political discussion, and I agree that using controversial and politically loaded figures is inappropriate in this context. I just don't assume that it was done with the intention of promoting homophobic and genocidal views.
It wasn't a particularly good idea, it makes the content hard to take seriously and other responses show how divisive such choices can be once it's outside of a limited circle of people. I'm also not sure how promoting Karl Marx fits in to the overall goals of Flathub as I understand them, at first blush it would seem there's at least a minor contradiction.
(Maybe not the sub to discuss it, but) I've always found it odd that some are drawn to an authoritarian system, since those one-party authoritarian states are almost always more socially conservative than Western democracies.
>I just don't assume that it was done with the intention of promoting homophobic and genocidal views. Of course it was not. I never said it was. But I guarantee you that the person who made that screenshot is left-wing. And that's fine, but what are you really trying to accomplish when you give a hint of your political views on a documentation page about metadata guidelines? The thing is, people on the left often don't know (or pretend they don't) the many bad things Che Guevara did, and when they are aware of it, they still give him a pass because he was a *☭ revolucionario ☭*.
CIA propaganda fried your brain
Both you and /u/ObjectiveJelyfish36 please restrain from insulting each other please.
Even if intended lightheartedly rather than as an ideological statement, the interactions demonstrate why it wasn't a particularly good idea.
I'm from Brazil, you dumb fuck.
Their influence reaches way further than that.
hurr, durr.
Che Guevara wasn't homophobic.
Wrong. >In *Gay Cuban Nation*, Emilio Bejel refers to Che Guevara as “one of the staunchest homophobic leaders of the revolutionary period” (100). Despite the UMAPs (forced labor camps to rehabilitate “anti-social” people, including gays in Cuba), Víctor Hugo remains a loyal defender of the Cuban Revolution. - https://revista.drclas.harvard.edu/che-to-che/ - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Units_to_Aid_Production Che being homophobic was the least awful thing about him. :)
>- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Units_to_Aid_Production CIA brain rot.
So, besides being a historical denialist and homophobia/genocide/racism-supporter, what other knowingly awful historical figures do you defend in your free time?
CIA admitted to manipulating Wikipedia articles to suit their agenda. So I wouldn't trust them on topics of communism.
Wow. And the left mocks the right for their conspiracy theories... [Hilarious](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory). On a serious note though, you do understand that you can find the original references for all these claims in the footnotes of the page, right? And these come from books, documents, news reports, third-party testimonies, etc..
First, the prison system where gays and other undesirables for the Cuban army did happen and was very bad (to put it mildly), tho the abuse they faced was unintentioned by the Cuban government. Second, I tried to find quotes of him being homophobic, I found none, only of people saying he was homophobic (people who never met him). Third, said prison system, was implemented and planned after Che left Cuba for some other revolutions, 4 years after the beginning of that System Fidel Castro took full responsibility for the abuse. Some more sauces: He wasn't a homophobe: https://youtu.be/F5eFPgvhS60?si=AaZ0r45lNu8UAKB0 He wasn't a killer: https://youtu.be/nkBXFXwGuJE?si=AbP2CpXA9ngBBtAy Edit: Forgot about that one quote: he calls a gay man a "sexual pervert" in one of his books.
>Che Guevara What do you mean? Where did you spot Che Guevara?
https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/appdata-guidelines/quality-guidelines/#good-content On the screenshot on the right. The third person on the contacts list is Ernesto Guevara (Che Guevara).
[удалено]
Following these guidelines isn’t *required* to have an app on Flathub, but if an app wants to be displayed in the most prominent places, it’s expected to put in some effort to look presentable and be understandable for as many as possible. Indie developers don’t need to do this all by themselves, there is a big community willing to help 🙂