Hi
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 6:12 PM Christophe Fergeau <cferg...@redhat.com> wrote:
> I think the main objection is with making spicy too easy to install (and
> to upgrade). Once we ask someone to test a spicy flatpak and it works
> for them, we don't want them to stick to it, start requesting for
> flathub availability so that it gets regularly updated, and for this one
> small feature that would make spicy a perfect fit for them (which is why
> in the first place Marc-André has been trying to discourage use of
> spicy).
>
Indeed. So far it is there as an "example":
commit 64a0eeab8ddd2ca6b2d3b57b7f46e99877bfab7e
Author: Pavel Grunt <pgr...@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Jul 21 11:02:57 2017 +0200
Add flatpak builder manifest file for spicy
To give an example for creating flatpaks depending on spice-gtk
Tbh, I think we should remove the flatpak from spice-gtk source tree.
It doesn't make much sense to have it included imho, unless we have a
good reason to build it on a regular basis, which imho is not
something we need as a library or even a testing client.
--
Marc-André Lureau
_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
