I can only say that from the beginning I'm disappointed – or maybe actually sad – that instead of focusing on a way to hide/exclude non-free software from Flathub, Fedora has chosen to directly compete with Flathub.
Sorry for the above post, I overreacted a bit.
Still, from my perspective, I don't see why there's a need for a portable packaging format, and I think having one has more risks than benefits.
I'd like to hear your point of view though.
Each distro has a different vision, and different standards of what the software should be like.
It's not that you can't install a Debian package on Arch because one is .deb and the other is .pkg.tar.xz.
It's because a Debian package won't integrate well with Arch, because eg. on Debian stuff is supposed to start automatically after installation, and on Arch it's supposed NOT to start.
@Wolf480pl Besides sandboxing or all features that ostree brings, the main advantage is obvious to me: whatever I work on, user of any distribution can benefit. It does not matter if you are Void zealot, a fan of musl running Alpine or comfy OpenSUSE user – you can just take your favorite music player and use it as is; that effort has been made once, not multiplied by number of possible distributions.
@Wolf480pl I joined Arch as a trusted user in 2011 and for a long time I've been packaging mostly desktop packages. I consider it a complete waste of time in terms of benefits to actual Linux userbase.
But doesn't installing a flatpak application with bundled megabytes of libraries, including glibc, defeat the point of using Alpine and musl?
@Wolf480pl That's something you should ask Alpine users. It was just an example.
We are a cute and loving international community Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ !