How we review

1. What we evaluate

For featured reviews and guides we look for: clear install path, backup/export story, authentication options, upstream release activity, and whether admin interfaces can stay off the public internet. Stars on Orivana are estimated catalog scores for browsing only — never treated as live GitHub metrics.

2. Guides first, navigation second

Orivana is an operator publication. Guides, topics, collections, and lab-noted featured reviews are the pages we write for readers and search. Short project blurbs and filters exist only as navigation aids so you can find official upstream sites — they are not scraped article dumps. Thin template listings stay noindex so search focuses on deeper editorial work.

3. Lab notes (anti-generic)

Featured reviews increasingly include lab notes: hardware or Compose context, a failure we actually hit in review, backup/restore habits, and exposure choices. Guides follow the same bar — prefer concrete operator steps over vague "consider your needs" filler. If a page cannot say what breaks and how you recover, it is not ready to feature.

4. Review workflow

1. Shortlist — constrain by job-to-be-done, license, Docker needs, and hardware.
2. Read upstream — install docs, security notes, export paths.
3. Write — pros/cons, audience, FAQ, and links to related guides.
4. Correct — reader tips to support@orivana.xyz update pages when facts change.

5. What we do not do

• Sell rankings or “editor picks” placements
• Mirror upstream READMEs as long-form journalism
• Claim unofficial popularity scores are live GitHub stars
• Provide legal, security, or compliance advice

6. Related policies

Read our editorial policy, disclaimer, and about page. Corrections: support@orivana.xyz.