Potential process:

• We need a way to pre-render the app tiles
• Interactive review by a group of reviewers, e.g.
  • App tiles for new/recently updated apps are displayed on a website with Github login, reviewers can allowlist apps
  • App tiles are sent to a Matrix channel, reviewers can allow/denylist via thumbsup/down
• Apps on the home page are filtered using the allowlist created by the review flow

Idea for first implementation:

• Add a toolbar to the app page with controls for moderators (e.g. "Add to Allowlist")
• Toolbar allows providing a reason why stuff gets denied
• Look into rules for stuff to feature (e.g. specific screenshot rules)
• Look into formats for featuring stuff
• Make sure "More" subpages are not confusing
• Bot to annoy people in addition to moderation tools on the website?
• Linter for stuff that can be automated (name and summary length, icon size, icon doesn't fill the entire canvas)

For Edge and Skype:

• Wrong author ("by"). It is confusing when these packaged apps are not supported by the original developer. For Edge it is stated that is not an official Microsoft package, but I think this should be reflected in the author field as it is the first thing we see.
• Wrong project website, because the project is the packaging, not the app itself in these cases. Especially if we consider the website as a way to access support.
• Packagers for these applications should not use a reverse DNS name resembling the application author's domain name.

Things that could be scanned relatively easily by an automatic system, and therefore checked before apps are added to Flathub:

• Icon fills the entire canvas
• Icon is a symbolic (i.e. all non-transparent pixels are the same color)
• Name >20 characters
• Summary >35 characters
• No screenshot captions