I agree there are a lot of distros to package for, but I'd say the bonus of not having to maintain and update all the dependencies outweighs that fact.
For example, there are a lot of tools that can generate Debian packages for you if you don't want to spend any time learning the manifests. I assume these exist for most distros.
Smart distros keep things close to upstream so the burden is small.
This is a weird argument.
Now you want each developer to manage dependency updates for their application? I don't trust them to develop their own app let alone apply security patches properly.
Arch has aur, arch can sideload rpm/Deb's, Mac has home brew, who needs this?
The only people I see using flatpak is the 50 odd Linux users we have at work, they constantly have dramas trying to make things work around home directory sandboxing, permissions, updating and more
> Single way
Why is this valuable? Just saying it doesn't make it true.
Why do we need a single way to install?
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but giving up home dirs and a bunch of other platform specific benefits is a cost I'm not willing to pay for some made up ideal that gives me a worse experience.
Are you trolling? I think the answer is obvious: less duplication of efforts may make the linux ecosystem be more lean which may mean more manpower to... bring the year of the linux desktop.
Distro package managers have more than 20 years doing this. If you want to replace them I think there should be fewer drawbacks. Otherwise you are throwing out decades of design, thought, bug fixes for something more problematic.
If the packaging is done by the dev you are assuming that 1% extra effort wont be spent playing chess instead of adding features.
If the packaging is down by an interested party for that distro you are assuming that a person competent to write a package file is even competent to say write an app let alone interested in doing so.
Flatpak sounds like a shitshow, but the not because it doesn't meet your specific requirements.
That doesn't mean I enjoy compiling some incarnation of webkit every few weeks for multiple hours on a laptop, in particular if it's just for a single application (in this case: Nextcloud client). Same for 32bit stuff, I have absolutely zero use for these libraries outside of closed-source games, so I'd rather have them just work than full control over them.
I put my software in my webpage and whoever wants to download it and use it does it. If they don't trust it well then I'm sorry.
https://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/hosting-a-repository.html
The other side is that Software Developer Foo isn't necessarily going to have the resources/inclination to work with your distro maintainer. You may decide to avoid Foo's software as a result, and that's totally fine—but if I like Foo's software and want to use it, Flatpak gives me that opportunity.
Staying silent is as good as encouraging the echo chamber outright.
People are pushing this shit because it's trendy not because it's good.
But basically, as with anything open source, if you don't like it, don't use it, make some other choices, or build your own. I see a lot of people whining and stamping their feet here but not a lot people building alternatives. Quit whining & start coding if it matters that much to you. As far as I can see there's Flatpack, Snap, and not much else here because nobody can be bothered apparently.
I don't trust developers to designate things as stable.
Now is flatpak secure for installing closed source app? At least not when they have full x11 access when using x11 desktop.
> like some windows pleb
I'm not sure if you're serious or making fun of stereotypes and thus don't know how to respond.
Who is asking this exactly?
As an arch user and technically a fedora, Gentoo, slackware, Ubuntu, debian user, I'm not asking for this.
I like how I install packages.
Installing garbage from a webpage like some windows pleb or having to eject weird desktop download things after drag and dropping things on a Mac is not something I want.
Please stop pushing this idea about flatpak being better, its not for a lot of users and for me, security doesn't even enter the equation.
But the idea that random flatpak maintainer has better security processes I place than the sec team for many distros is laughable at best.
You can wrangle the argument all you like about ideal world scenarios but the fact of the matter remains that suboptimal ideal still works out as more effective in the real world. Tragedy of the commons problems generally do require sub optimal solutions in the small to solve in the large.