Icon design and name guidelines are too strict. Many apps already on the store break them.

• E.g. the 20 characters limit is to small for even two long words.
• Or not allowing PascalCase, disallows many app names like LibreOffice.

And app icons have to be "In line with contemporary styles", which is currently flat and simple design. Contemporary styles change all the time. If an app wants to look old, why not let them?

https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/appdata-guidelines/quality-guidelines/#app-icon

Someone on the internet with their opinion on video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYqYpbMY9vE

Edit: Generally these guidelines are good and will improve the browsing experience on flathub. Hopefully they'll loosen some of those icon and naming restrictions.

It makes it clear that they're guidelines and not requirements. I'm not sure how styling is inappropriate.

It's a guide, it's there to guide you, not to break your knees if you don't follow it all the way

I like the guidelines. Honestly, I wouldn’t mind a few more. Other app stores have WAY more requirements for art assets and metadata.

The first time I made a mobile app (many years ago when I was basically an amateur), I was like, “What the hell? I have to make all these icon sizes?” But it was good for me to be forced to comply with professional standards. I don’t think Flathub should go the Apple route and require everything be just so but, as annoying as it may be at the time, it’s good practice and it’s good for the wider Linux desktop ecosystem.

For the most part I really like this, tbh. I see lots of bad/janky looking stuff on Flathub and it's good to have these guidelines.

Like, I look for an app, see an icon that looks like it was made on ms paint in 2002, screenshots showing not just the app but also the desktop background that looks like an old Gnome 2 desktop.

Stuff like that instantly raises alarm bells in my head and makes me think "this app isn't maintained and this store is full of junk just like the MS store"

Your post body could've been a comment as well since it answers your header. Now everyone who answers kind of has to respond to your header and body

I agree with you. Guidelines are very good and appreciated but they shouldn't be enforced.

The following guidelines are optional, but recommended.

A screenshot shouldn't be optional.

That dark theme screenshot is bad and light theme is good is nuts because if theme is important you provide a 50/50 screenshot showing off the themes.

+1 for suggesting karl marx as a lorem ipsum user profile lmao.

most of it is okay, but I do think it was a bit rude to basically call out a bunch of app devs for their icon styles, and suggest theyre updated for "modern styles", but other than that I'm not against their own repo wanting to have some polished metadata

My opinion is pretty much the same. The guidelines for naming and screenshot are great, and it would have been good if they were applied in all stores, not just FlatHub. The icon guidelines, on the other hand, are too much, IMO.

Yeah, this is... Not great.

"Yeah, just download LibreOffice from flathub. No, you need to have a space in it. Yes, that's the one; I know the icon is wrong."

And, quite frankly, I don't know how they think they'll get away with requiring specific icon styles. Big software companies tend to be very protective over their brand recognition. And small indie shops tend to host not have the resources to remake their icon every time Google decides to roll out a new fashion sense.

There's also the security issue of not allowing apps to present themselves in a way that people recognise. How do I trust I've got the legitimate version of an app?

I know it's "just a guideline", but that's a dogwhistle for "do this or we'll hide your package".

Nice

I think it's a good start but some of them are kinda over doing it.