Alright, here's a response article to @martijnbraam's "Developers are lazy, thus Flatpak". I'll be addressing some of their claims by explaining why some of the design decisions make sense the way they are.
theevilskeleton.gitlab.io/2023…
Edit: should there be a response article to mine, I'll respond it here (unless it doesn't address any of my points).
#Flatpak #Linux #FOSS #OpenSource
Response to “Developers are lazy, thus Flatpak”
Recently, the article “Developers are lazy, thus Flatpak”, by Martijn Braam, was published to criticize a few things regarding Flatpak. I want to go over the article and address some points that were raised.TheEvilSkeleton
This entry was edited (1 year ago)
Hubert Figuière
in reply to TheEvilSkeleton • • •When I see the mess that are distro packages. For example on Fedora Exiv2 is build with BMFF off which mean that some camera format are not supported... so it breaks my app. (I could also say why that kind of option is wrong too)
The codec mess is another.
Or Debian improperly building poppler.
TheEvilSkeleton
in reply to Hubert Figuière • • •Hubert Figuière
in reply to TheEvilSkeleton • • •I can tell you the story of Debian package the developer version of AbiWord in a release, the packager telling me off (I'm still upstream) and U***tu telling me they DGAF because it's in Universe.
That's why AbiWord was my first submission.
Hubert Figuière
in reply to Hubert Figuière • • •