<table><tr><td style="">ngraham added a comment.
</td></tr></table><br /><div><div><blockquote style="border-left: 3px solid #8C98B8;
color: #6B748C;
font-style: italic;
margin: 4px 0 12px 0;
padding: 8px 12px;
background-color: #F8F9FC;">
<div style="font-style: normal;
padding-bottom: 4px;">In <a href="https://phabricator.kde.org/T10812#182242" style="background-color: #e7e7e7;
border-color: #e7e7e7;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 0 4px;
font-weight: bold;
color: black;text-decoration: none;">T10812#182242</a>, <a href="https://phabricator.kde.org/p/cfeck/" style="
border-color: #f1f7ff;
color: #19558d;
background-color: #f1f7ff;
border: 1px solid transparent;
border-radius: 3px;
font-weight: bold;
padding: 0 4px;">@cfeck</a> wrote:</div>
<div style="margin: 0;
padding: 0;
border: 0;
color: rgb(107, 116, 140);"><p>If you are asking for my personal opinion, I propose to split current KDE Applications into parts:</p>
<ul class="remarkup-list">
<li class="remarkup-list-item">Base/essential applications (Dolphin, Ark, KCharSelect, KCalc, Kate/KWrite, Konsole, Spectacle, Gwenview, Okular, thumbnailers, more?). Ship them together with Plasma[1]. I really love the Fibonacci release cycles of Plasma for bug fixes. Also, Plasma developers sometimes decide to do an LTS release, and the base applications would also benefit from LTS support. All of them should use the same 5.x (later 6.x) version number.</li>
</ul></div>
</blockquote>
<p>I was actually going to suggest this myself, so I'm glad you did. :) I agree 100% with this as well as your other ideas about splitting up apps into different releases.</p></div></div><br /><div><strong>TASK DETAIL</strong><div><a href="https://phabricator.kde.org/T10812">https://phabricator.kde.org/T10812</a></div></div><br /><div><strong>To: </strong>ngraham<br /><strong>Cc: </strong>cfeck, aacid, Yakuake, Okular, Dolphin, Kate, Spectacle, Konsole, Gwenview, KDE PIM, KDE Games, KDE Applications, ngraham<br /></div>