@gbraad IMO from perspective of some long-term independence even Gitlab would be a better solution. I know that creation of Flathub predates GNOME's move to Gitlab by 2 years, but I think it would have been an option even in 2016-17.
Yeah, let's be honest: easy to say when it wouldn't be you, or the peanut gallery at large, maintaining it. It would be a strategic mistake to waste our limited resources on self-hosting every single thing for ideological reasons.
@barthalion I don't think it's for ideological reasons. Being 100% reliant on your direct competition isn't about ideology. And self-hosting isn't the only alternative. Gitlab.com would still be a better option because Gitlab Inc at least isn't in the business of making an OS and app distribution. But yeah, it has its ideological costs, too. That's how I got into maintaining apps on Flathub. Their authors weren't willing to maintain their flatpaks on Github.
Yeah, thinking about it in terms of "direct competition" is what falls into ideological reasons. A random company producing skates is not competing with BMW or Mercedes. Linux desktop is less than a fly to MS, and also selling Windows is not how they make money.
GitHub is where users are, despite what people on Mastodon may think about it.
@barthalion I was in the business of selling Linux when it had <1% and Linux was definitely not a fly to MS execs and sales ppl. Now with 5% it could be a fly to them, I dunno. But I know one browser whose business model is basically counting on generosity of their direct competition because they're also a fly to them. And it has not been going well for them because if your model counts on not being a real threat to your bigger competition, you never will be.
@nielsdg I know there is a lot of pragmatism involved and I know that from operational perspective it's probably the best option, but I just think that if your premise is "it's fine to be on an MS platform because MS doesn't see us as a threat" you basically rule out any major ambitions from the very start because if Flathub became really popular, MS would logically see it as a threat. I also thing there isn't any "for now". The bigger Flathub gets the more difficult it is to change that.
@nielsdg at this point, it should be trivial to move it off github, if necessary. the worst part then would be on deciding where to move. Most other things are in place - it would mean some weeks of work.
What feels weird to me as a user (and again, I can see the reasons) isn't really that it uses GitHub, but that this implementation detail is not abstracted away for flatpak publishers. It has the upside of (huge) ease of automation, but it feels like those websites that at some point end up dropping the user at a SharePoint or Google Docs.
@xanathar Yes, the experience feels very fragmented. You have repos on Github.com, you watch builds on flathub.org/builds and you have a developer portal on flathub.org/. At least the last two are getting integrated. I don't think it's by design. It's more out of necessity. But maybe if the decision at the beginning hadn't been to rely so heavily on Github workflows, the experience would have been more united.
Gerard Braad
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •Jiří Eischmann
in reply to Gerard Braad • • •🔗 David Sommerseth
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •@gbraad
A move today would probably benefit more going in the direction of @forgejo
🔗 David Sommerseth
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •Bart Piotrowski
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •Jiří Eischmann
in reply to Bart Piotrowski • • •But yeah, it has its ideological costs, too. That's how I got into maintaining apps on Flathub. Their authors weren't willing to maintain their flatpaks on Github.
Bart Piotrowski
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •Yeah, thinking about it in terms of "direct competition" is what falls into ideological reasons. A random company producing skates is not competing with BMW or Mercedes. Linux desktop is less than a fly to MS, and also selling Windows is not how they make money.
GitHub is where users are, despite what people on Mastodon may think about it.
Jiří Eischmann
in reply to Bart Piotrowski • • •Vadim Rutkovsky
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •Niels De Graef
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •I mean, I guess it's more a matter of being pragmatic (for now). The curl maintainer mentioned this too recently: mastodon.social/@bagder/114992…
daniel:// stenberg://
2025-08-08 08:21:06
Jiří Eischmann
in reply to Niels De Graef • • •I also thing there isn't any "for now". The bigger Flathub gets the more difficult it is to change that.
razze
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •karolherbst 🐧 🦀
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •Marco Mastropaolo
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •Jiří Eischmann
in reply to Marco Mastropaolo • • •Builds | Flathub
Flathubrazze
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • • •