Can't wait until my entire os is just a kernel and a filesystem and every other program is a bloated flatpak filled with trash and no oversight.>Firefox and Thunderbird are the first 2 applications making this transition, but they won't be the last. We're building the infrastructure and the tooling to make Flatpak delivery the standard for RHEL desktop applications. https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/firefox-and-thunderbird-rhel-flatpaks-what-it-means-you
I decided to ignore Red Hat's existence when they changed their logo from two dinosaurs fighting to Carmen Sandiego.
>>109420210Also, not quite the windows exe model because windows still provides desktop apps, but it's getting close.
>>109420210flatpaks are based, what's your issue with it again?
>>109420298they function and freetards have to have something to bitch about and something functioning as intended pisses them off because it means Linux will be easy to use for the masses. They don't want (you) using Linux and being free like them, they treat it like their gay little tranny club. They aren't "people" they are demons.
>>109420298It's changing the desktop model for el. Flatpaks are not the careful selection of desktop applications with limited security and bug fixes applied and even more cautious feature enhancements all built using the libraries and tools from the os like the apps are now.That's the biggest issue, but I also don't want 3 versions of gnome and multiple versions of dependencies all hidden behind some generic linux exe installed to get a desktop and the applications I want.
>>109420566I don't really forsee it as a problem so long as things are vetted safely and we adhere to safety standards. I mean sure it might cause issues for smaller projects, but the situation can easily be monitored monolithically. Because no matter what you do, you are going to face issues with malware. You can sit on 3 versions of dependancies and still get infected, just ask the AUR developers.Flathub is the futureFlatpaks are an actual solution.The benefits outweigh the issues, and if something is infected, you can always roll back and you can still take a flatpak to bits and remove and replace the infected bits.
>>109420637Yeah, I'll see how the flatpak model actually gets implemented, probably RHEL 11, and I rechecked that blog again and they still have the rpms available at least for firefox and thunderbird for now. They've already removed libreoffice and I just see this heading even further towards large portions of the desktop being completely user installed or with very limited involvement from redhat.
>>109420727I think we need to be less concerned with what the end users are doing with our software. This kind of control mindset is what lead to Windows being as terrible as it is. I will take a little malware with my freedoms, because fighting malware is a losing battle. Alienating users who are just looking to get away from such under the thumb control is bad form. I think if we trust the general population, we will be 80% safe with malware only affecting a small install base of users, not just in RHEL but across all of Linux.Compare and contrast that to how AUR handles things and the entire server got infected by a few bad players. At least this distribution model affords the user some level of control over the systems THEY OWN.I don't care how many transgenger people get angry, the mental illness of trying to control every outcome is not the answer and only destroys the freedoms we currently enjoy.Flatpaks are big picture, and macro in form because they respect the users' freedom of pragmatism.It is definitely a conversation worth having, and I have yet to see an argument against it that makes sense to me.
I would like to add that we are well aware of the drawbackssize of files etc, but I mean if we look at things, I think most users won't have 90 versions of applications installed. MAYBE they will have 2-3 of specific applications.Let's take Gimp for example, because it is a nice easy target to make fun of.Let's say tomorrow they release a version that removes some feature, you could roll back and not affect the entire system.Oh but they then add some new features, you can keep both on a thumb stick, etc. Nobody NEEDS to maintain them, they just run with backwards compatibility in say KDE Plasma 7.1 or Gnome 52 on Linux 7.5They can be archived by whoever wants to archive them, but I feel that most people won't really bother or care. It is still foss and adding said features back into a project can be simple. But this also affords the developers some freedoms.They can remove features at will as they work towards a better solution. The end users are less affected by these sweeping changes, therefore they bitch less and the developers are free to work.Compare that to what the alternative is? Installing an entire repository onto your PC just to get an application to run. This can affect the security of your entire network. You are blindly trusting someone to maintain a server, files, and everything just so YOU can install Gimp 2.4. What's to stop them from installing a rootkit? Gimp had no control over that, it is some guy in Russia maintaining it. Now he has access to your financials.Whereas a project like flatpak just lets you work with whatever version the developers intended. Gimp 2.4.flatpak lives on forever. You can download it, back it up, use it, etc. Sure mr Russian can host said file and do something similar but the attack vector is now less. You don't need root privileges to run the program and if there is a security risk in flathub we can patch it out within minutes.
>>109420210Your entire OS in 2030 will be systemd-kernel, systemd-fs and everything else is a flatpak.You're welcome.
>>109420940t-thank you
Damn, Linux turned to absolute shit before it even made it to the desktop
>>109420298Based on xdg-app, of course.
>>109420566>careful selection of desktop applications with limited security and bug fixes applied and even more cautious feature enhancements all built using the libraries and tools from the osLike AUR? LOL!!!!!
>>109421023>AUR>update the version number, build and ship it.Not quite the same process redhat goes through for desktop app updates.
>>109420940GNU/Linux/systemd
>>109420940I've been saying this. In 2030 there will be no "dristros." There will essentially be one Linux distro with different names.>All wayland>All systemd>All gnome >A combine one stop repository That what happens when corporations get involved Arch, Pop, Mint,Fedora?Won't matter, they'll all be identical under the hood
>>109420210It's not 2016 anymore. You are getting mad at something that was planned 10 years ago.
>>109420298In my experience, applications take up unnecessarily large storage spaces.
>>109421102Most of the OG Linux bros are older Gen X and older Millennials. They're still using Slackware and Gentoo. The younger users are all shithead zoomers who know ass all about technology, let along the deep history of Linux. They don't GAF, couldn't care less. They just a windows replacement. The OGs don't GAF because their Slackware still works fine. It's over.Linux will be dead in a few years.
>>109420210>Can't wait until my entire os is just a kernel and a filesystem
>>109421102kde plasma will be allowed to exist
>>109421384Not of Red Hat wins
>>109422466it's cute you think we care, we don't. Just because the company I work for invests in Gnome doesn't mean we use it. Most of us use Macs or Linux with KDE Plasma, xfce, dwm, or i3. Like 1 person actively uses Gnome here.
>>109422484You will care when it's too late. You think you're going to be able to install anything that isn't systemd dependent in a few years? You're a legit retard if you do.
