I have started adding quality criteria at http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing#Quality_criteria based on various previous discussions. Have a look and comment, please.

The criteria need to be as discrete as possible, so it's easy for testers to give their thumbs up or down. They also need to be easy to evaluate, of course.

For instance, let's take the example of Security. Everybody agrees that an app causing security risks shouldn't make it to Extras. Fine. But how a tester can detect that? I guess the answer is that those testers should check that there are not known security bugs filed in bmo, or perhaps even security reports against dependent packages upstream. But in no way they are going to do the security checks themselves. Another problem is "how insecure" an app can be.

Similar examples can be found with missing features, system performance affected, etc.

Another question that comes to mind is the content: would maemo.org distribute apps dealing with pornography, racism...?

And then something that is not clear (to me at least) is what happens really when pressing thumbs up/down. Right, thumbs up means that to me this looks good to Extras. But does a thumb down mean that it should go back to extras-devel? Or just stay in extras-testing? How do we tell "still not ready for Extras but don't send it back to extras-devel"?

And finally, what are the criteria that needs to be met to push an app to extras? What about this:

- Minimum 11 days quarantine.
- Minimum 10 testers + 1 admin giving thumbs up.
- No thumbs down.