2017-07-14 19:05 GMT+02:00 Debarshi Ray <rishi.is@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 09:44:18AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 03:31:30PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: >> > F29: packagers (of graphical applications) must create Flatpaks of >> > their applications if possible. They *may* keep standard RPM >> > packaging. >> >> At least we see where this is going. >> >> If RPMs of the graphical application work fine now, what on earth is >> the point of forcing packagers to make Flatpaks? Sandboxing isn't one >> of them - as already explained, sandboxing is orthogonal to packaging. > > How about reliable online updates of running applications as a > benefit? Is this really more reliable than using dnf (for graphical packages like Recepies and Builder)? What exactly is it that makes flatpaks more reliable? /Andreas > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
