Team Votes(#455)

Back

ID	Category	Title	Creator	Status	Result
455		Invite AsciiWolf, the maintainer of the Xonotic Flatpak, to the Extended Team and authorise them as a 3rd party Flatpak distributor for Xonotic. This does not make Flatpak an official Xonotic distribution method and only grants the Xonotic Flatpak a verified checkmark on Flathub which means that the package is either distributed by the original developer OR by a trusted 3rd party.	Dr. Jaska	PASSED	4:0(1 abstained, 10 didn't vote)

2025-03-07T20:47:29Z - 2025-03-17T20:47:29Z

User	Decision	Comment
Freddy	YES	I would however prefer that other team members have access and documentation to release new versions to flathub in case AsciiWolf is not available. This is especially important in case of security related bugfixes. AsciiWolf shall still be the main point of contact for flatpak related topics. Most users will interpret the "verified" checkmark as a sign of an official package, so we should strife to produce high quality packages that are released with minimal delay compared to the zip packages.
Antibody	NONE
bones_was_here	ABSTAIN	As raised in chat, the public assumes "verified" == "officially supported" (many examples online) but this vote breaks their expectations with a contradictory policy: "official" on flathub.org but UNofficial on xonotic.org. This vote also contradicts itself by making AsciiWolf a 1st party (by inviting them to the team) while stating them to be a 3rd party. I support making the flatpak official and am happy to help get it done, but there's no sense adopting a misleading policy when there's nothing stopping us being consistent and meeting all expectations. It looks like a second vote will be needed.
divVerent	YES	fully agree with Dr. Jaska. It is common for the owner of a flatpak'd project to not have direct commit access, and be verified anyway. The verification is about asciiwolf having our permission. And we can put conditions - Dr. Jaska's conditions sound reasonable.
Dr. Jaska	YES	This verification would be beneficial in order to attract more players as Flatpak is becoming a more and more popular method of installing software, especially on immutable Linux distributions and some Flathub frontends give varying priority based on verification status or show warnings about unverified packages. As for our upstream this should not introduce additional maintenance burden on our upstream developers as Xonotic Flatpak should continue to handle Flatpak exclusive issues in their downstream. If we receive a notable increase in Flatpak exclusive issues we can then take actions, as an example actions such as ask AsciiWolf to patch in a note to not report issues upstream but in the Flathub Xonotic repository or add an issue template which has a checkmark for "This is not a Flatpak exclusive issue".
Halogene	NONE
illwieckz	NONE
k9er	NONE
LegendGuard	NONE
morosophos	NONE
MrBougo	NONE
Nitroxis	NONE
Spike29	YES	Flathub is the de-facto standard way of distributing distro-agnostic apps on Linux these days (outside of the Ubuntu world), and some popular distros like Linux Mint hide unverified flatpaks by default. As Freddy pointed out, the rest of the team should also be able to update the flatpak, in case AsciiWolf is absent.
terencehill	NONE
z411	NONE