On Wed, 2022-06-29 at 20:41 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 29/06/2022 20:25, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> GNOME Software already has a hidden setting for this:
Yes and it should be configured to "['RPM', 'flatpak']" for all
non-ostree Fedora variants (Workstation, Spins).
Flatpak should come first as that
what will be used in the long term.
When the Flathub filtering is removed, most Fedora packages will be
silently replaced by Flatpaks, some of them very low quality (DEB
rebuids) because the Flathub versions are always greater than in
Fedora.
> It defaults to Flatpaks because they are sandboxed and are much
> safer than unsandboxed applications.
-
https://github.com/search?q=org%3Aflathub+filesystem%3Dhome&type=code
-
https://github.com/search?q=org%3Aflathub+filesystem%3Dhost&type=code
> However, I believe Flatpaks built from Fedora RPMs should take
> precedence over Flatpaks built from Flathub.
Fedora Flatpaks are almost dead. Let's check this page:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/releases/
Fedora 36: 22867 (RPMs) vs. 104 (Flatpaks).
Fedora 35: 29801 (RPMs) vs. 104 (Flatpaks).
Fedora 34: 35742 (RPMs) vs. 92 (Flatpaks).
Can we investigate why is the case, its not like the packages in the
repo cannot be package as flatpak. We could be crafty here as we can
control extensions too (and can patch application if needed). I mean
fedora silverblue 36 was shipping with gnome 41 apps on release.
Maybe have fedora flatpak for certain popular applications(which can be
flatpaked) as a blocker for this proposal.
> Flathub should only be preferred when there is no Fedora Flatpak
> available.
I don't see it in the proposal.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly(a)easycoding.org)
Thanks & Regards,
Marc Pervaz Boocha