----- Original Message -----
On Wed, 2018-02-14 at 15:52 -0500, Owen Taylor wrote:
> * There are a lot of popularly reviewed applications in Fedora that
> are *not* on Flathub.
Hi,
just out of interest, what with the applications which have their
flatpak scripts, but which do not fit Flathub?
Maybe this had been answered already somewhere, I only missed it, thus
if so, I apologize for repeating the question, but just in case: will
Fedora provide its own Flatpak repository, thus one could rely on
versions of the host dependencies?
No, the Flatpak and host are separate. I'm guessing that you're worried
about mismatches between evolution-data-server and its clients. There's
really no other way to make this work than to work towards a stable, and
versioned API.
If not, and the plan is to use
Flathub exclusively, will Fedora push the applications there instead of
the upstream/package maintainer in case where the upstream/package
maintainer is not in favor of github, the place where Flathub is
hosted?
The upstream maintainer doesn't have to use Flathub, and GitHub, but they'd
have to replicate the setup. Which is one of the reasons why people use
Flathub to build and distribute those rather than doing it themselves
separately.
But I believe Fedora cannot use Flathub this way, because it
cannot guarantee host dependencies there and also because Flathub is
meant to be unrelated to any distribution (I understand it that way at
least).
Flatpak cannot guarantee host dependencies either. That's both a feature
and a bug, making it harder to build applications that rely on specific
versions of host services, outside the sandbox, and easier to upgrade
applications without pulling new dependencies at the host level.