• Kilgore Trout
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    Flatpak as a software distribution solution already exists and is already widespread.

    • lemmyingly@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Flatpak is far from perfect

      • bloated
      • sandboxing causes confusion
      • interacting with it in CLI can be interesting
      • all packaged libraries rely on the developer of the package you installed to update
    • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Now all we’re missing is the universal enforcement piece, which I think is non-trivial. It might take off organically but as per my example above, I’m not hopeful.

      • JayDee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        “Universal enforcement” meaning what? On its face your proposal sounds fundamentally antithetical to what linux is. It’s an open source environment, meaning literally anyone can create software and post it online. Are you wanting all directories to only accept flatpak? I don’t think that would go over well.