On Tue, 2022-11-08 at 09:33 +0000, Pete Biggs wrote: > I know this is getting way of topic, but this is primarily why I shy > away from Flatpak. You download a blob of "stuff" and you have no > real idea what is in that - it could be some ancient bug-ridden > library that the dev has decided to use because that's what was on > their system then writing it 20 years ago and they can't be bothered > to update it.
I get that people are concerned and there are some legitimate concerns. But some of these are just due to misunderstandings or NIH syndrome. First, flatpaks are created from a known set of content which is described by a declarative file. The content is controlled so you know you're rebuilding from the same thing all the time. Second, flatpaks for Gnome tools such as Evolution are created and managed by the same people who create the Gnome software. Snaps are created by Canonical, for Ubuntu. They're not just some random assortment of junk that some hacker cobbled together in their basement and tossed out on the internet. If you trust Gnome or Canonical to create the _software_ you run on your system it seems odd to not trust them to build a flatpak or snap for it; really there's no one better to do it. The content of a flatpak/snap is actually MORE rigorously managed than whatever assortment of package versions you have currently installed on your system. And yes, containers can be leaky. In fact some of that leakage is needed (you certainly want to be able to attach files to emails, that exist outside the flatpak container!) But the leaks are minimal and getting plugged more and more every day. They're very very good by now. And with respect to the specific leak mentioned earlier, "dependency hell", they've never been leaky in that way because that's one of their primary design goals. > And the fact that it doesn't interact with anything makes it less > integrated into your system - unless you go through a load of arcane > Flatpak command line arguments to make it talk to your environment. I didn't say it didn't interact. I said it didn't _interfere_. The Gnome services talk to each other over dbus etc. and of course Evolution is no exception. Evolution sends notifications for new mail, calendar events, etc. to the desktop and all this works correctly, even though I'm running Gnome 3.36 and Evolution 3.46. The Evolution database etc. is maintained inside the flatpak container and it doesn't interfere with the system installed version (if any). I literally did NOTHING except "flatpak install org.gnome.Evolution" and it worked. > Yes, I know it's not that difficult, probably. But it's also not > always as straightforward as you are making out. Maybe not always: of course I can't speak to all flatpak packages. But for Evolution, it absolutely is. I was skeptical too. But I needed a newer Evo because my company was bought and switched from GMail to Exchange, so I tried it. And, it Just Works. I do have many problems with the UI changes introduced in Evo 3.46: putting buttons for important things on the title bar makes NO sense. But, that's not an issue with the flatpak. _______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
