I've tried to review program installed from PPA and got same error.
I've also found this bugreport: Cannot review software updated from PPA
A notable qoute from an Ubuntu Bug Squad volunteer:
I have tried rating another software (indicator-weather) from a PPA and I have got the same stacktrace, so we can make this bug a bit more specific, like Reviewing software from PPA doesn't work and doesn't tell the user that he can not rate software from PPA's, only from the official repos.
The bug is currently marked as invalid as it was filed against an Ubuntu release that has reached the end of its life (EOL). It looks like nobody picked it up, but there is the possibility that the behavior was changed in the meantime in other bug reports (please edit or provide your own answer if you have more information).
If you boil this back to the simplest terms:
What is an official repository and an unofficial one (Local Repository), including the ones created outside of Launchpad.
An official repository is one published as part of Ubuntu, managed by Canonical and Ubuntu MOTUs.
They currently consist of main, restricted, universe, multiverse, partner, extras and some exist in multiple "states" (-proposed, -updates, -backports, etc).
The repo names might change in time but the point is that these are .
On mirrors: The contents (MD5 hashes of files, etc) of the repository are signed with the Ubuntu key so even if you're pulling the official files from a non-official mirror, you can be fairly certain that they are the original files.
How do repositories created outside of Launchpad compare to the ones found inside of it in terms of first, security, followed by any other features that both offer.
You can't implicitly compare security levels between a Launchpad PPA and another non-official repo hosted elsewhere. It all boils down to how much you trust the person running the repo.
The difference is with a Launchpad PPA, you can see the person who is packaging things. Most times you can see the source. In other repos (eg: dl.google.com or repo.steampowered.com) you likely know neither.
Trust is an odd thing.
Feature-wise a repo is just a particular structure of directories and files, hosted on the web. The only special features I've ever seen are authentication to allow only people who have purchased software to download it but this very basic web server security and hardly special :)
How do official software repositories differ from the ones created by 3rd party PPAs in Launchpad or outside of it.
This is perhaps the biggest of the questions and it's probably best answered (if indirectly) by another question: How to get my software into Ubuntu?
Official repo software is supposed to have a development process behind it. Levels of testing that ensure quality and an amount of peer review. PPA maintainers can encourage this sort of process but it's not something you can assume. Some are better than others.
Best Answer
No, there is no unofficial "PPA" software center for Ubuntu.
One of Ubuntu's primary goals is to be a stable and reliable desktop Linux for the masses. That is why the packages (and specific versions) in the Software Center/official repositories are carefully vetted and checked for stability. The official repositories (with partners, etc.) should be sufficient for the needs of most regular users.
Why? : Software from a PPA should not be blindly installed
In theory, adding even one PPA package, no matter how "trusted" the source, has the potential to break Ubuntu such that it would be beyond the capability of the average user to fix it.
Thus, installing software from a PPA has to be a conscious and considered choice:
Most of the answers of the type you mention -- "add this repository and install" -- WILL address these concerns for the questioner/user; those that don't are quickly edited/downvoted/commented on.
The three-step add-update-install-from-PPA process makes it more likely people will think a little about what they are doing
The "pain" of adding individual PPAs is somewhat like the "pain" of having to use
sudo
instead of just being root all the time. Compared to a one-click install of unofficial packages, the terminal-based three-step process increases the chances that the user has given some thought to what he or she is doing.Updating PPAs can take longer, because they are not mirrored
I agree that updating PPAs often takes longer for many users, because they are hosted only on launchpad.net and not mirrored. Hopefully Canonical is aware of this and is considering some kind of solution. Note that there is no intrinsic (software/design-wise) reason PPAs should take longer to update than any other repository - they have the same structure.
You can always use a PPA manager to make life easier - try Y-PPA Manager!
Managing PPAs from the command-line can become tiring; if you have three or more PPAs, I recommend you consider the Y-PPA Manager utility. You must install it from a PPA (naturally! :-), and is available as:
y-ppa-manager
inppa:webupd8team/y-ppa-manager
Some screenshots to give you an idea:
Main Window:
Searching all PPAs for "vlc":
Listing all packages in a PPA:
For a true user-contributed "Software Center", try Arch Linux