Nico Kadel-Garcia píše v Út 18. 07. 2017 v 22:44 -0400: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Debarshi Ray <rishi.is@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > 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. > > > > Huh? How would you get sandboxing without Flatpaks? Unless you are > > proposing a different sandboxing technology. > > By putting them in "/opt", the way other sanely packaged 3rd party > components do? How does that ensure any sandboxing? Jiri
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
