Some thoughts about flatpak
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
This is a follow-up of https://trisquel.info/en/forum/are-there-any-freelibre-flatpak-repos in the proper section.
> manually check the license of the software
What a breakthrough.
> "enable users to select only verified and/or FLOSS apps"
These are future plans, and it should probably better come as a separate repo (instead of the intended "repo subset"), but at least it is a stated aim for the project. There is even an open entry about it at the end of their to-do list. It is empty for now (and on github), but it is nonetheless there:
https://github.com/orgs/flathub/projects/2?pane=issue&itemId=12646665.
Still, I believe LibrePak should be an entirely separate entity to be even considered as a candidate for inclusion in an FSDG distro. If ever this is really needed, that is. "Flatpak" may not be as flat as its name suggests, it looks like it comes with extra cleaning tasks for the user, as mentioned there:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1029223/why-is-the-flatpak-repo-folder-so-huge
This does not sound like a massive improvement over the current deb based system with a curated repo, shared dependencies and a proper package manager - and of course, Trisquel's award winning "Add/remove applications" application manager. In fact, from the user's perspective, it rather sounds like a regression. There must be better ways to implement sandboxing for those users who really want that.
"IKEA is a world-wide known brand whose success was partly built upon having developed and refined the idea of flatpacking their furniture." Can we also rent a Red Hat van to carry our bulky flatpaks home, or what?
https://www.flatpak.org/faq.
Which totally libre software is there in the world that doesn't have some type of .deb package that it can be installed with?
I'm just wondering if there's really any need for flatpaks in a libre environment.
Which totally libre software is there in the world that doesn't have some type of .deb package that it can be installed with?
I clicked on the first category, with 38 applications: https://flathub.org/apps/collection/editors-choice-apps
All the applications listed there are free software. I could not easily find a .deb packages (certainly because it does not exist, but I obviously checked rapidly) for 19 of them: Setzer, What IP, Tangram, Pika Backup, NewsFlash, Metronome, Obfuscate, osu!, Apostrophe, Identity, Journable, Video Trimmer, Flatseal, Contrast, Secrets, Junction, Solanum, Fragments, and Hackgregator.
The second category is https://flathub.org/apps/collection/recently-updated where all the versions of the applications are more recent than on the just-released Trisquel 11, if they are in its repository.
The third category is https://flathub.org/apps/collection/new where no application is in Trisquel 11's repository.
Ahh. Well, there's nothing I see in those pages that I would use, but I'm sure that somebody would want some of those programs.
Clearly, all we ever wanted is more applications, whether we need them or not, and more recent versions of everything, whether we need it or not. Also, a new repo that accepts all licenses by default. FSDG distros just make things too easy for the user, it's unfair for non-free software.
EDIT: it is also unfair for truly FSDG compliant distros not to be certified.
I've browsed around flathub before and was surprised by the number of abandoned programs and programs that looked like they probably only had one user - their creator. Flathub is like a very colorful github in a way.
I have doubts if investing effort into Flatpak makes sense at all.
Guix and Nix also facilitate cross-distro application deployment. They also allow unprivileged installation (once themselves globally-installed by root). And optionally also allow containerized execution. Plus they solve dozens of other problems with software.
They also ease development which creates incentive for application development to package their stuff for Guix or Nix. That's a major strength over both traditional distros and things like Flatpak. And that's also why I expect the (arguably) limited number of packages in Guix/Nix to be less and less of a problem in the following years.
The main thing missing (with Guix at least) is probably user-friendliness. This is probably what would be best to work on.
I have no experience in Flatpak, though, so I might have missed some other unique strengths of it. Do you know any?
>"Guix and Nix also facilitate cross-distro application deployment."
Guix is all free software, and the package manager is pretty easy to add to Trisquel. Unfortunately, I find that there's nothing there that I ever really need. But it's good to know that it exists if I ever did need it.
>"I have no experience in Flatpak, though, so I might have missed some other unique strengths of it. Do you know any?"
I used flatpak to install a newer version of okular awhile back. It required a massive amount of disk space (several gigabytes if I recall correctly), and the okular version that was installed would not do basic things, like print. I'm sure that for the right program it probably works very well, but it did not seem useful for my purposes.
> I have doubts if investing effort into Flatpak makes sense at all.
It certainly makes sense for the "Linux desktop powers": https://trisquel.info/en/forum/cross-distro-app-store.
One flatpak to rule them all.
I am a translator!
The main thing missing (with Guix at least) is probably user-friendliness. This is probably what would be best to work on.
I agree but I have not noticed anything in that direction so far. When I asked for help on the guix help list, people were nice and helful but the answer to problems (not raised by me) such as "updates take too much time" are terribly user-unfriendly (use manifests, I still haven't understood how I am supposed to do that).
My current strategy is to use something from Guix as a last resort after everything else I tried does not give any result at all for something I absolutely need. Flatpak, that I have not tried, look far more user-friendly.
> Flatpak, that I have not tried, look far more user-friendly.
This is certainly not something to dismiss. I am left wondering whether FSDG friendly distros could gather and create a LibrePak repo of sorts, in order to get the best of several worlds: pooling curating efforts, allowing users to try more recent versions without borking their system, and making sure that all this is happening within the safe haven of fully free software.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires