Hey,
I am the main developer behind Fidus Writer (https://www.fiduswriter) and have been that since 2012. For the last few years, the main way I have been distributing Fidus Writer has been as a Snap. It is the only Snap I maintain . As you can see on the Fidus Writer Github account [1], I also maintain a number of other open source software packages. I am also the Chair of the W3C Web Editing WG.
I write all that because I saw a post here that one has to be a “star developer” to be able to publish packages in “sensitive categories”. I am not sure why Fidus Writer would follow into that category (it’s a word processor for academics), but I can see that all recent releases are being held up due to “human review required due to detection of potentially harmful contents in snap metadata metadata-snap-v2_snap_metadata_redflag” which apparently is code-speak for the maintainer not being a “star developer”.
Wondering if it might make sense to instead transition this to being owned by a separate account in Fidus’ name and then getting that account verified?
The result with regards to yourself should be similar but the user significance is that you’d have a green tick mark for verified rather than gold star for developer, which would position your snap a little better for users regarding trust because it’s directly “this is owned by upstream” rather than “this is owned by Johannes” where people might not make the association.
You could eg make a second account and add your existing user as a collaborator to allow uploads from either account, but if you did do that then for future snaps you’d be in the same position regarding the personal account.
The policy that’s blocking you isn’t the sensitive categories bit which is that no one can submit to those categories without star/verified status, but the more generic bit of the policy that’s every revision is inspected regardless of category, which is to say the idea is that you should ideally find those revisions accepted in the future without being a star/verified account but there’s a mandatory review each time and that delay can cause friction you’re seeing here.
Sounds good to me. Anything to make the package looking more official.
I noticed that builds of the package as old as a week ago are queued for review. Does that mean that someone from Canonical has to look at each build manually and that releases will be delayed for at least a week each time?
I just tried to change some of the plugs, replacing network-control and network-observe with network in hope of the build not being flagged and hoping that I don’t need them any more. If you udnerstand you correct, changing anything in my snapcraft configuration will make no difference, correct?
With a changed configuration, I tried to create a new build which I hoped would not be stopped from being released. But I first rejected all the releases that had queued up that all had the same configuration and therefore would be holding up the queue.
That seems to have been a mistake because now the latest builds were automatically rejected with this explanation: “Rejected. Automated review found 0 errors and 0 warnings. Rejected automatically after manual rejection from revision 1548.”
I have now created a new account with username “fiduswriter”. Can one of you help me to transition the fiduswriter package there, or do I need to create a new forum post for that?
Hey,
Hopefully someone is back from the holidays and can help me with this. The packages have not been building successfully for several weeks now. This makes it hard to push out bug fixes to users.
