A thing that could help would be to invite/force PPA owners to rate their own archives. For example, xorg-edgers are very good at this and clearly state that their PPA could be dangerous (i.e. "bad"):
Maybe Launchpad could provide an additional field "rating" other than the description, showing a big red warning in case the rating is bad. Or better, instead of the rating, Launchpad could ask for the scope of the PPA: testing, production, fun and so on.
I'm in favor of a self-evaluation system instead of a system based on popularity (and similar factors) because while it can be true that a popular PPA is publishing good packages, it's not true that an unpopular PPA provides bad packages.
A thing that could help would be to invite/force PPA owners to rate their own archives. For example, xorg-edgers are very good at this and clearly state that their PPA could be dangerous (i.e. "bad"):
https:/ /launchpad. net/~xorg- edgers/ +archive/ ppa
Maybe Launchpad could provide an additional field "rating" other than the description, showing a big red warning in case the rating is bad. Or better, instead of the rating, Launchpad could ask for the scope of the PPA: testing, production, fun and so on.
I'm in favor of a self-evaluation system instead of a system based on popularity (and similar factors) because while it can be true that a popular PPA is publishing good packages, it's not true that an unpopular PPA provides bad packages.