App descriptions are read by people deciding whether they want the app,
not by people maintaining it. Several were spending their last clause on
facts the reader cannot act on and would not recognise — and in Stoat's
case actively talking the app down: "Heavy (16 containers) and does not
federate" is a maintainer's note, not a description.
Eight rewritten, all the same fault:
stoat "Heavy (16 containers) and does not federate", and LiveKit
named as though the reader would know what it is
vikunja "Runs as a single container on SQLite, with no database sidecar"
stalwart "in a single container"
gitea "written in Go", plus "self-hosted Git service" twice in one line
vaultwarden "an alternative implementation of the Bitwarden server API
written in Rust" — says what it is to a developer, not what it
does for you
speedtest "implemented in Javascript"
adguard "resolving blocked domains to a local blackhole address"
matrix "Installs Synapse plus the Element web client"
Deliberately kept, because they change whether the app suits you rather
than merely describing how it is built: Rocket.Chat's free-edition user
cap, Mattermost's unlimited users, Navidrome's Subsonic compatibility
(it tells you which phone apps will work), Stalwart's protocol list, and
Gluetun's provider count.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
934193d901
