Thank you @pherjung for starting this thread!
If I want to buy clothing I’m happy not only to have H&M but have a huge choice from other shops and boutiques.
Yes, it’s good that users who are not tinkerers, coders, nerds or experimenters have a safe space and peace and not to worry about technical and safety problems.
Yes, merging seems not a wise proposal to me. Better keep Openrepos apart. Then it’s the installer’s responsibility.
I haven’t encountered OpenRepos apps yet that were worse in quality[1] than the ones coming from the Jolla store, but I have seen apps on the Jolla store that advise the user to delete them and redownload from OpenRepos instead 
[1] I don’t want to suggest that these may not exist.
As a total noob, it would be great to find for example Whisperfish, Yottagram & Microtube in Jolla store. Additional to Bitsailor etc… I don’t mind that there are 3 stores, but for “basic” apps it would be great to find them from Jolla store
If I remember correctly, wasn’t there a time when Jolla changed something in their conditions and/or some devs didn’t want to accept Jolla’s restrictions anymore and therefore stopped publishing their apps via the Jolla store?
I think it’s the current consensus. There is only a need to explain correctly why there are various stores.
I don’t remember there being any (at least widespread) malicious apps on OpenRepos, but if I remember correctly, in 2014 or 2015, at least one OpenRepos repository accidentally contained packages with the same names as some SFOS core packages, but with newer version numbers and they were incompatible with SFOS. If you had used that repository to install an app, the Warehouse-app would mark those incompatible packages as updates and a few users unknowingly managed to break parts of their operating system with a few swipes and taps.
There are now plenty of vibe coded apps. And we are absolutely not safe from an attack like publishing an app, wait a long time, update the app with malicious code.
And the Jolla Store is safe from that somehow?
I never submitted an app, but knowing how restrictive it is I would say yes. Check this page: Harbour | Sailfish OS Documentation
That is why I included the part in parentheses… Some degree of trust is always needed when installing apps, because even with open source apps, the compiled binary migh not match the source code.
Pherjung:
Imagine parents who want to give their 15 yrs old daughter a privacy safe phone. This could very well be a Jolla 2. In that case building trust is important.
For tinkerers and experimental devs it is nice having a C2 and other stores to play with.
Then she will have to mostly rely on Android apps anyway, because even such basics like background services are not allowed in Jolla Store but perfectly fine with Android apps
That is true. But maybe thats okay?
I’d say the average user is opening Jolla store. In Jolla store you are presented with f-droid and aurora store to install as a complement. Which the average user can install then too. So the average user will complete its Sailfish apps with some android apps. Thats maybe the most logical way to use the phone?
Then tinkerers will be happy to have Chum or Open Repos. But i wouldnt suggest them ever to new users myself.
I think they’ll be happy with the inhouse provided jolla store + the 2 android stores included in it.
Maybe there could be still some ‘hints’ about installation of the 3 things: Android App support + the 2 stores, all 3 being now in the Jolla store in not a veeery obvious place.
I honestly do not understand why everyone seems to be fine with Sailfish apps being artificially kept at a disadvantage compared to Android apps on Sailfish. Sorry.
The Jolla Store has barely any useful apps without Chum or OpenRepos, so maybe it would be better to just give up and stay with Android then?
Maybe everyone is different?
Myself i use almost only Jolla Store apps (a few times per week an android app) and they are very much satisfiying all my needs…
I’m currently reading through the Harbour FAQ and came across the following paragraph:
Use Qt.openFileExternally() method in QML and QDesktopServices::openUrl() in C++ to trigger a sideload. Use the absolute file path to the RPM file. If you want to monitor the progress, the following signals on the session D-Bus are available:
Would that mean I could technically build my own app store, put it on Harbour and Jolla would allow me to install software from wherever I like as long as sideloading is enabled?
I just think that the ‘first’ stage for a new user shall be Jolla Store + Android stores to complete the Jolla one (which again seems to myself quite complete).
After some time using the system, it can become time for a little more risk taking (meaning here using other repositories).
Maybe i take the story as picturing it on desktop linux, here is the metaphor with say fedora or opensuse:
First time user has only the (incomplete cause FOSS) fedora/suse repos enabled. Plus Flatpak (here metaphorically representing the AAS container) to complete it (codecs and so on).
After becoming used to linux, will come the time when user can enable third party repos on fedora/suse, also understanding therefore the risks and knowing how to do backups and/or disabling the third party repos before an upgrade…
Okay, I’m giving up.
I mean i understand your point of course, i dont mean to underestimate it!
Just the thing is to be ‘realistic’, an average new user wants Whatsapp video calls, Instagram scrolling, Tiktok and so on. I dont myself need them. But 95 percent of users do. So the alternative isnt anyhow on OR or Chum…