As Paolo said, I am also in favor of a more relaxed approach. However, I do not think there should be a distinction between apps that optionally or progressively enable egress and those that inherently have egress. Otherwise, I would seriously consider building my app with inherent egress as an app with optional/progressively enabled egress, simply because then it can be Runs on Atlassian. I do not see why this would not be allowed. The concept is just forcing me to work around it at the cost of usability.
This, and I would add that also without Forge Remote.
All “pure” Forge apps should be Runs on Atlassian - that’s the point of Forge (for me at least). I think it’s important to draw a simple, clear line. This benefits both customers and partners. If I had to explain Runs on Atlassian to a customer today, I would say it’s an evolving concept. But it does not have to be. If you exclude Connect on Forge and Forge Remote, Atlassian has full control over egress, storage, and compute. I think it should become clear from these discussions that app egress, if not at all, progressively or inherently, should all qualify for Runs on Atlassian. The point is that, for all of the above, Atlassian remains in control if an app is a “pure” Forge.
Please, please keep it simple (or tell me where I am going wrong with this).