Simply put, "no". Debian and Ubuntu ".deb"
packages too often don't
follow the File System Hierarchy, they may have different layouts and
package naming capitalization schemes for matching Fedora packagers
like "PyYAML", they may have overlapping pre-set uids and mismatched
group name conventions, etc., etc, and the grub intigration for new
kernels is likely to be a nightmare. It would be a full-time job for
several competent engineers to do that kind of package impedance
matching.
I'm not interested in debating Debian and derivatives packaging
guidelines, but I generally prefer how Fedora does things (except
notably, modularity).
Just..... no.aot abd deb inside a "podman" baswed
container? Maybe?
But it seems not worth the pain.
The whole point of this change was to allow working with DPKG tooling
without leaving the comfort zone of Fedora, without forcing a VM or
container indirection. And trust me on this one, I do not inflict
Debian packaging on myself by choice so I'm really keen on not adding
any needless step, to the point where before submitting this change I
had my own homebrew apt package. As a bonus point, this change also
retired apt-rpm which had been dead and unmaintained for a decade, and
according to the upstream developer himself it had unfixed security
issues.
So apt-rpm needed to go anyway, and there was no reason not to replace
it with regular apt (apt-rpm would otherwise conflict with apt). And
by the way, even though I initiated this change I later lost my
ability to implement it, but it's been done since f32 thanks to Neal
Gompa and Sérgio Basto.
I hope it clarifies what was actually implemented.
Dridi