New Application Status
Ingo Klöcker
kloecker at kde.org
Tue Dec 3 08:02:25 GMT 2024
On Dienstag, 3. Dezember 2024 01:17:41 Mitteleuropäische Normalzeit Justin
Zobel wrote:
> I'm a bit frustrated by our new application development pipeline.
>
> I see applications appear on apps.kde.org and in official namespaces on
> GitLab before they have passed KDE Review.
In my opinion you are conflating two completely different things. Let's discuss
them separately.
Let's start with apps.kde.org.
> I feel this is falsely advertising to the world that the app is ready
> for use.
I agree that this could be improved. A possible solution would be to use the
brand-new lifecycle attribute in repo-metadata to clearly mark apps that
haven't passed KDE Review as beta. I don't think that hiding them from
apps.kde.org is a fair solution. On the contrary, I think having beta apps on
apps.kde.org could possibly attract the attention of other developers who'd be
interested in working on a new app and of beta users who'd be interested in
giving the app a try. The possibility to get early feedback is a key value of
FOSS. "Release early. Release often."
https://community.kde.org/Policies/Application_Lifecycle clearly documents
what differentiates playground projects from reviewed projects (although this
wiki page needs to be updated to mention the new lifecycle attribute instead
of the old projectpath attribute). I think it's just a matter of making this
information more visible to avoid wrong expectations.
> The button on apps.kde.org that says 'Install on Linux' takes me to
> Discover and then tells me that the app was not found in any software
> repositories.
Is "passing KDE Review" really connected in any way to "packaged by some
distro"? I guess that's a question only distro packagers can answer.
> It also tells me to report this to my distribution which can lead to
> noise on distro bug trackers. It can also lead to noise on the KDE bug
> tracker because a user wants to install the application but can't.
Discover probably shouldn't do this for beta apps. I have no idea how the beta
state could be communicated to Discover. Is there something suitable in
AppStream? I didn't see something obvious; we could probably use tags. To
avoid duplicate information this should somehow be added automatically based
on the lifecyle attribute in repo-metadata.
Now GitLab namespaces
> I think keeping applications in user namespaces until it has passed KDE
> Review would solve both of these problems.
I think keeping applications in user namespaces until they have passed KDE
Review is an excellent way to hide them from potential co-contributors. Maybe
it's just me because I don't read blogs, follow people on any s.m. and don't
scour GitLab user namespaces for interesting projects, but I have never
stumbled accidentally over an interesting project hidden in a user namespace.
Regards,
Ingo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-devel/attachments/20241203/b5f25414/attachment.sig>
More information about the kde-devel
mailing list