Team Silverblue Succeeds Fedora Atomic Workstation, Aims To Be In Great Shape By F30

[nanonyme]

no. they have process to rebuild rpm after human edited its .spec file. the whole point of flatpaks is to not require any human interaction *multiplied for each fucking distro*

flatpaks need to be made *once for all distros* and by people who created software in the first place, just like they have to create tarballs anyway. those people have made choice, software exists. distro maintainers did not make choice, most software packages *are not packaged for any distro*, and we are talking about packaging for *all distros*

That's not... entirely true. A Flatpak targets a specific version of a runtime. These runtimes are not maintained indefinitely (not clear at this point how long they will be) and porting your Flatpak to a newer version of a runtime requires development effort. The upsides is you don't need to do that often and you can be sure your Flatpak won't break while using the exact same runtime version

[Candy]

[...] by people who created software in the first place, just like they have to create tarballs anyway. those people have made choice, software exists [...]

Aprox 10 years ago every of them said "It's up to the package maintainers (e.g. distro) to make packages. We only provide the sources!". Now you encourage them to wear the shoes by creating flatpaks...

The only valid point here - which I fully agree with - is a base packaging format over all distributions. But this is more a wet dream by someone. Different distros have different philosophies. That's why there are so many different distros.

[pal666]

You are missing one of my previous comments. Most modern distros have automated processes for generating (e.g.) RPM packages.

no. they have process to rebuild rpm after human edited its .spec file. the whole point of flatpaks is to not require any human interaction *multiplied for each fucking distro*

But then. Even flatpacks need to be made... By people who are working for free... Their own choice by the way...

flatpaks need to be made *once for all distros* and by people who created software in the first place, just like they have to create tarballs anyway. those people have made choice, software exists. distro maintainers did not make choice, most software packages *are not packaged for any distro*, and we are talking about packaging for *all distros*

[pal666]

Someone could release a faked flatpak somewhere on the net and the user installs it

same thing with rpm or deb. why would user install this instead of official flatpak released by software vendor?

[Candy]

no, you can't. when there are no appropriate rpm or deb package, you just can't. and who is going to make packages for your today's choice of distro?
again who is going to work for you for free?
it is not like these maintainers have nothing better to do than doing monkey work

You are missing one of my previous comments. Most modern distros have automated processes for generating (e.g.) RPM packages. But then. Even flatpacks need to be made... By people who are working for free... Their own choice by the way...

[pal666]

Ubuntu is apparently a Bantu word for "humanity", or so says Wikipedia. Canonical is a South African company and the idea behind their distribution is a simplified experience anyone can use as a desktop for common tasks. It makes a good deal of sense for a brand name

if all your customers are native bantu speakers

Every time I tried to double click the flatpak after installing flatpak support Ubuntu Software would immediately crash

that is interesting, but slightly off fedora workstation topic

[Candy]

not, if they move gimp out of repo to flatpak

Thats right of course! But we are not there yet!

[pal666]

I can use yumex or dnfdragora or gnome-software to install the appropriate rpm or deb package from the correct repositories (or even via terminal=.

no, you can't. when there are no appropriate rpm or deb package, you just can't. and who is going to make packages for your today's choice of distro?

But then: As long as Fedora keeps producing rpm packages side by side

again who is going to work for you for free?

For the sake of operability of Fedora, I don't see anyone who want's to turn these badly needed maintainers away.

it is not like these maintainers have nothing better to do than doing monkey work

[pal666]

I really hope that distro maintainers will use *pak* only for very, very few applications.

*pak* is not intended to be used by distro maintainers *at all*. *pak* is intended to be used by software vendors. i.e. by libre office devs, octave devs, krita devs, etc

[pal666]

some random guy from Poland or somewhere has my back, and I get the update.

this does not scale when you have N software projects and M distros. you need N * M guys from poland. what flatpak tries to do is to make software vendors produce one flatpak each, usable by M distros, and free guys from poland to work on base distros.