On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 09:41:30PM +0200, nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> Then I'm glad there is absolutely no plan to preempt flatpack >> technical assessment by shipping one or more GNOME apps as >> flatpack-only, leaving Fedora users for whom flatpack does not work >> yet behind, and bypassing distribution consensus processes. > > Please tone this inflammatory rhetoric down. It's not helpful. When you > said you wanted this part of the thread to close, I thought that's what > you meant and took it seriously. > > Here, I assume you're talking about no one having packaged GNOME > Recipies (apparently _written_ as a Flatpak proof of concept) in > traditional RPM form. But, we can't make *any* upstream author package > their stuff in RPM for us. > > But, if you want that as an RPM in Fedora, _no one is really stopping > you_. Go for it! > > If you're talking about something else here, then I missed it > completely and encourage you to be more straightforward and stick to > the technical. > I think he's worried that applications might intentionally get left behind that someone would want. Also, GNOME upstream doesn't do the packaging for Fedora GNOME anyway. That's the Workstation WG's job. Just like how the KDE SIG packages the Qt/KDE stack, the Workstation WG (aka GNOME SIG) does this for the GTK+/GNOME stack. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
