On 17 March 2014 16:45, Alex Merry <alex.me...@kde.org> wrote: > On 17/03/14 15:25, Aurélien Gâteau wrote: >> What worries me with this approach is it feels like comparing apples and >> oranges here. To me a framework "tier" is about its dependencies, not >> about its maturity. I would suggest to instead introduce an orthogonal >> information: maturity, which could have the value: "new", "stable", >> "deprecated".
+ 1 > ... which I think is where the confusion about tier 4 has come from. > > This maturity information would be familiar to anyone familiar with the > Qt Project's processes, which would be a bonus. I think I've advocated in other forums that we need a "maturity" metadata flag for Apps and Frameworks that relates to our Application/Frameworks Life Cycle and is documented somewhere prominent so users know what we mean and promise, something like: Experimental / Playground / Unstable Incubator / Review / Tech Preview Stable / Released / Supported / Active Deprecated / Inactive Unsupported / Retired / Abandoned John. _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
