Motivation Opportunity is upon us! For the past few years, the desktop Linux user base has been growing at a historically high rate. StatCounter currently has us at 4.14% desktop OS market share for Q2 2025. For comparison, when Fedora Workstation was first released in Q4 2014, desktop Linux was at 1.38%. Now, StatCounter measures...
      • warmaster@lemmy.world
        0·
        3 months ago

        Bazzite ships Flathub unfiltered.

        Last update (which replaced Discover with Bazaar) changed that.

        so no taking a precompiled binary and shipping that.

        All FLOSS apps on Flathub are built on trusted platforms by default, in the open and verifiable. Same thing with Brew.

        Not including proprietary software in the default config is a valid choice every distro has to make.

        The sudden success of Bazzite comes from how easy it is to use.

    • Botzo@lemmy.world
      0·
      3 months ago

      That’s certainly part of the motivation (see the 4th paragraph).

      Yes, image based. No, not Bazzite specifically, but silverblue (and kinoite) under the fedora banner directly.

      But that’s not really the point of the article. In order for those to go mainstream, flatpak and especially flathub have a lot of maturing to do first, and the author lays out a pretty good roadmap with thorough explanations.

      • quarterlife@lemmy.sdf.org
        0·
        3 months ago

        They’re already mainstream, any belief otherwise is ridiculous to the point of being parody.

        Meanwhile you have Fedora getting legal threats because they’re shipping broken software in their own flatpak repo that exists only to waste developer time and project resources at the expense of its users and their experience.

  • beleza pura@lemmy.eco.br
    0·
    3 months ago

    didn’t read the article, but i never got the point of having a distro-specific flathub repo. isn’t being distro-agnostic the main thing about flatpaks?

      • beleza pura@lemmy.eco.br
        0·
        3 months ago

        sounds weird to me. aren’t we replicating the repository problem if each distro decides to make a flatpak repo according to their own philosophies?

          • beleza pura@lemmy.eco.br
            0·
            3 months ago

            i don’t have an issue with multiple flatpak repos. i’d actually find it very interesting if we went a more decentralized route with flatpak (maybe kde, gnome, mozzila would each have their own repos). but i don’t see the point of a distro-specific flatpak when we already have normal packages. compatibility is kind of a non-issue, since you’re not supposed to install them elsewhere anyway (unlike flatpaks)

            also, i see absolutely no reason to use fedora’s flatpak repo on debian given that flathub exists already. you could add it if you want it, but what’s the point?

  • exu@feditown.comEnglish
    0·
    3 months ago

    It’s great they’re having this discussion, but some of the arguments seem overblown and imply Flathub does less reviewing of app than actually does.

    Outdated runtimes aren’t great either, but as they learned with OBS, just updating to the newest version broke a bunch of stuff.

    See this blog post for a response that was made to similar criticisms during the OBS issue. Flathub Safety: A Layered Approach from Source to User