Urgh, unfinished trains of thought.
----- Original Message -----
> * Benefit to Fedora contributors: they can make their packaging
> available across distributions and distribution versions.
Most likely duplicating upstream work on getting that same
...on getting that same application into end-users hands. What do you think would
happen to the opt-in creation of Fedora Flatpaks if you get none of the benefits
of being able to empower upstream with maintaining that package?
> * Benefit to upstream: if they already have a good relationship
> and their application is well maintained there, they can point users on all
> distributions to a Fedora Flatpak.
> * Benefit to Red Hat: We build infrastructure technology and content that
> can take into the RHEL context and make runtimes and Flatpaks available to
> our customers with the type of guarantees that we are already providing for
> RPM content.
That doesn't seem to require
That doesn't seem to require the Flatpaks to be build from binary RPMs, or RPMs
at all. The Fedora/RHEL runtime is part of the OS, so no duplication of work,
but packaging application-supporting libraries would be.