Applications Lifecycle Policy

[Harald Sitter]

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Kevin Ottens <ervin at kde.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tuesday, 4 July 2017 13:20:43 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
>> The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
>>
>> Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
>>
>> https://community.kde.org/Policies/Application_Lifecycle/Draft
>
> Didn't we have cases of applications moving between KDE Applications and
> Extragear?

Probably.

I do wonder if we can, maybe, get rid of Extragear as a thing
altogether. Extragear applications are KDE applications on their own
release schedule. At least for the purposes of the lifecycle I'd think
they are one and the same. Separating them by name only and calling
one "extra" kind of implies that the others are
common/normal/standard/default, when in fact they are simply released
at different points in time but otherwise the same.

Tearing down this artificial wall may well incline extragear apps that
have a particularly irregular release schedule to switch to the bundle
releases to get bugfixes out (i.e. committing to releases seem less of
a daunting thing) or the other way around if the fixed schedule turns
out to not work in an application's favor (I seem to recall Marble
having had some trouble with release prep).

(I do appreciate that this may also blur the line a bit too much given
we refer to the applications release as "The" KDE Applications
releases)

HS