On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Kevin Ottens <er...@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