El dijous, 5 de desembre del 2024, a les 13:57:26 (Hora estàndard del Centre d’Europa), Ingo Klöcker va escriure: > On Donnerstag, 5. Dezember 2024 10:27:13 Mitteleuropäische Normalzeit Ben > > Cooksley wrote: > > Trying to coming full circle on this here, but in summary sounds like > > there > > are a couple of things to change going forward: > > > > * For apps.kde.org, we should flag applications in accordance with their > > Lifecycle status in the metadata (ie. unmaintained and those yet to pass > > KDE Review should be flagged in some form or another) > > Yes. For beta apps. I'd say for unmaintained apps there shouldn't be a page > on apps.kde.org. Given that there won't be build artifacts for unmaintained > apps (at least not for long) there is anyway no AppStream data for creating > such a page.
In my opinion once a page exists it needs to exist forever. Imagine Okular goes unmaintained, I don't want the lots of pages pointing to https://apps.kde.org/okular/ to suddenly point to a 404 I want to see a page that says "This is unmaintained" but still has the old contents. Cheers, Albert > > > * We should institute tighter controls regarding releases of applications > > and ensuring projects pass KDE Review first > > Make that "stable releases". For good reasons our lifecycle policy > explicitly allows unstable releases for Playground projects (but not for > incubated projects). > > Regards, > Ingo
