@thelinuxEXP@mastodon.social Can you please give an example of a guideline you disagree with? I feel they're generally agreeable design guidelines. Follow your community style guides and ensure it fits within the borders so your icon renders properly and pretty.
https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/metainfo-guidelines/quality-guidelines/#app-icon
@thelinuxEXP I think generally the issue for KDE apps is that they're being migrated to Flathub after they've been well-established whereas GNOME apps tend to be built with Flathub guidelines specifically in mind.
I'm all for making that migration easier and encouraging more KDE apps. But I think that Flathub is appealing in large part because of its uniformity. And I think featured apps should be held to a high standard for presentation because that's the highest endorsement Flathub can give.
@thelinuxEXP@mastodon.social I think Okular was unfairly judged and they agreed in that post, but I'd contend that it doesn't fit Breeze's current icon guides, which I'd speculate is why it was "not contemporary".
If you want to say Flathub is biased against old apps, I'd agree but that punishes in all directions, including apps like GIMP.
But that's all just to be featured in the banner. If you want to stubbornly keep an old style, that's fine; but you're not owed the spotlight over newer apps.
@thelinuxEXP Appstream metadata is also not a new thing that is specific to Flathub. It's a freedesktop standard that's been around for a while.
@thelinuxEXP@mastodon.social I thought your rant about GNOME favoritism in icon guidelines was weird. Your complaint about icons was especially strange given that skeuomorphism is GNOME's entire look; KDE actually tends to have a more symbolic style. But they both agree on clarity and minimalism without looking bland or flat.
The guidelines also use good/bad examples from both ecosystems.
I do agree with the broad point that they should be separate but there's no evidence of discrimination IMO.
@thelinuxEXP@mastodon.social You're right it is just the banner, and that's why I didn't agree the guides were actively discriminatory. Platforms want to make good first impression, and it's not unusual to have higher standards for showcases than to get the app on the store to begin with.
One thing I want is more avenues to reward good apps that may not fit the guidelines perfectly. Like visibility rounds or a users' choice spot.
I hope that makes sense. I'm sorry for being rude in my initial post.