First off, thanks to both of you for getting this done.  It's something we've wanted on the ISV side of things for a while now.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <br> ==== Formal Prerequisites ====<br>  * In order to ensure transparency and to facilitate monitoring of<br>  quality and the state of the repository, a launchpad project must be<br>  maintained for the package. Each source package should have it's own<br>  repository where appropriate.</blockquote><div><br>This would be a troublesome requirement for someone like google who maintains all of their apps in the same repo.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <br>  * In order to assure that packages in third party repositories are<br>  being properly maintained, each landing page that offers an apturl<br>  link must also contain a prominent link for reporting bugs in the<br>  related launchpad project.</blockquote><div><br>What if the vendor prefers to handle all bugs through their own bug tracker?<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <br>  * Package namespace for the name should start with a unique prefix<br>  and not conflict</blockquote><div><br>Must we require a prefix when there is no chance of a natural collision? For instance, if google wants to ship google earth and the package name is google-earth, can we waive the prefix requirement?<br>  </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>  * Identify third party repository by custom package/source control<br>  field<br>  * add XB(S)-ThirdParty-RepoURL to the package that is uniq to<br>  identify where the master repo is<br>  * Identify right place to file bugs by custom package/source control<br>  field<br>  * add XB(S)-ThirdParty-BugFileUrl to the package that points to the<br>  bug report page (LP)<br> </blockquote><div><br>These seem a little onerous too.  If the control file already provides a website for the product, that should seemingly sufice as they are already required to have the bug tacker info prominently displayed there...?<br>  </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br> However, if necessary, the repository may actually be removed from the<br> users' sources lists. This may be necessary if there are severe<br> problems on the repository such as data lose errors, security<br> problems, repository maintainer is not cooperating. The repository can<br> not reapply for at least 1 year for inclusion again<br> </blockquote><div><br>I don't think we should make the 1 year a steadfast rule, or at least shorten it dramatically.<br> </div>Again, thanks for the work guys.  It's looking good.<br><br>-Brian<br></div><br>