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.


Flatpak isn't really here yet in terms of dominating "portable" packaging market. Distributions like Mint or Arch enable Flathub by default, but now it's not so clear if they should decide for user at all.

We're literally splitting hairs now.


Personally I wouldn't mind it if all of those "portable" packaging formats, (flatpack, appimage, snap, etc.) just died.

@Wolf480pl I'm sure @barthalion would because flatpak's partially his project

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.

@Wolf480pl @barthalion with all these people trying to (poorly) simplify packaging, it's just creating even more fragmentation and work for maintainers

@wowaname @barthalion
lol, the thing is:
IMO here, fragmentation is a good thing.

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 @barthalion i agree with you completely: distro package managers are fine. i was agreeing with your point of flatpak et al being unnecessary

@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.

@barthalion @Wolf480pl it's fine cause sometimes you actually need the app that for whatever reasons needs that shit
Sign in to participate in the conversation

We are a cute and loving international community O(≧▽≦)O !