On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 02:58:52AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Yeah, that last point is the real difficult issue, it forces you to keep
> the RPM in parallel with the flatpak, unless we were to either change
> RPM (yuk), or find a way to auto-generate a RPM wrapper around the flatpak
> to pull in it contents.
You need to keep the RPM anyway because there are users out there (e.g., me)
who are NOT going to install a Flatpak, but demand native packages.
*please*, *please* tone down the negativity. You can "demand", but the
project is not bound by demands. You have to *convince* people. There
are good arguments to keep RPMs around, at least for the foreseeable future,
so don't burn them by non-technical posts.