Gregory's Server@boud @santiagofn @afranke Flatpak makes privacy and security easy for the average user whilst making packaging easy for the developers. How does a package for one distribution have any benefits over this? I don't see any privacy or security benefits a deb package would provide over a flatpak. If anything it would be worse.
|
5 comments
@boud @santiagofn @afranke You are welcome to package the program however you see fit but quit soliciting developers into taking on a bigger work load.  @Myles124  I wasn't requesting developers to take on a bigger workload. I commented on the problems with Flatpak, and responded to your comment on Flatpak; short-term easiness is not the same long-term sustainability. A temporary workaround is often a useful step towards a long-term sustainable software package: it's a proof of concept. Fractal 5 does sound like a good achievement :). If people like it, they can work on the dependencies and eventually the package itself. |
@Myles124
See [3].
A .deb format package in itself does not help with privacy/security. However, the full package of files that are accepted through the multiple auto+human checks and packaging standards of the Debian community would help in terms of modularity, transparency and system robustness in checking the privacy and security of all the dependencies (see e.g. [4]). This contributes to the wider FOSS ecosystem, way beyond Debian.
@santiagofn @afranke
[4] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/nheko
@Myles124
See [3].
A .deb format package in itself does not help with privacy/security. However, the full package of files that are accepted through the multiple auto+human checks and packaging standards of the Debian community would help in terms of modularity, transparency and system robustness in checking the privacy and security of all the dependencies (see e.g. [4]). This contributes to the wider FOSS ecosystem, way beyond Debian.