1 Topic by throgh (edited by throgh 2019-08-25 09:57:10)

  • throgh
  • throgh
  • Package Development and Community Coordinator
  • Offline
  • From: Planet Earth
  • Registered: 2017-12-28
  • Posts: 2,924

Topic: Removal of Flatpak from repositories

Hello,

I think the package flatpak should be removed from the repositores. In fact there is access to prpprietary software. The other alternative: Disabling the access to the so-called Flathub, so applications like Steam (https://flathub.org/apps/details/com.va … ware.Steam) have no further possibility to be deployed and it is up to the users modifiying the system instead giving them an easier way to do this. What do you think about it?

Sorry for double-posting.  Got an error-message after sending! sad

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

2 Reply by zapper (edited by zapper 2019-08-26 00:53:38)

  • zapper
  • zapper
  • Hyper Cyber
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2017-10-18
  • Posts: 1,075

Re: Removal of Flatpak from repositories

throgh wrote:

Hello,

I think the package flatpak should be removed from the repositores. In fact there is access to prpprietary software. The other alternative: Disabling the access to the so-called Flathub, so applications like Steam (https://flathub.org/apps/details/com.va … ware.Steam) have no further possibility to be deployed and it is up to the users modifiying the system instead giving them an easier way to do this. What do you think about it?

Sorry for double-posting.  Got an error-message after sending! sad

If flathub is removed you cannot install any proprietary software via flatpak. Or can you?

I am not sure to be honest...

Ask Emulatorman or Luke what they think. smile

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

3 Reply by koszko

  • koszko
  • Guest

Re: Removal of Flatpak from repositories

Package manager without packages would be useless... or is there a flatpack repo, that only hosts libre sw and can be used instead of Flathub?

4 Reply by throgh (edited by throgh 2019-08-29 19:16:49)

  • throgh
  • throgh
  • Package Development and Community Coordinator
  • Offline
  • From: Planet Earth
  • Registered: 2017-12-28
  • Posts: 2,924

Re: Removal of Flatpak from repositories

koszko wrote:

Package manager without packages would be useless... or is there a flatpack repo, that only hosts libre sw and can be used instead of Flathub?

Good idea, of course it would be useless without a concrete source. I think it would be helpful having a concurrent libre repository instead of addressing also proprietary applications. It should always be an individual decision of the user, Thererfore this discussion and thanks for your points, zapper and koszko. :-)

Perhaps this could be a project being supported from all libre distributions and with the help of the community.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

5 Reply by koszko

  • koszko
  • Guest

Re: Removal of Flatpak from repositories

throgh wrote:
koszko wrote:

Package manager without packages would be useless... or is there a flatpack repo, that only hosts libre sw and can be used instead of Flathub?

Good idea, of course it would be useless without a concrete source. I think it would be helpful having a concurrent libre repository instead of addressing also proprietary applications. It should always be an individual decision of the user, Thererfore this discussion and thanks for your points, zapper and koszko. :-)

Seems like the same would be needed for many more PMs (package managers). I've seen some nonfree packages being served through quicklisp (PM of common lisp). Looks like it might also happen with Maven (PM for JVM-based languages) packages, since requirements for uploading to it's repos don't say, that the software has to be under a free license.

These are just examples. In the end, most of third party PMs out there (first-party one being pacman with Hyprebola repo in this case) allow nonfree stuff in their default repos (although there are exceptions, like ELPA). And even if all the packages are free, they might still be privacy unfriendly (difficult thing to check automatically), which is against Hyperbola's policies... (although maybe acceptable in other libre distros)

The question appears: does it make sense to create a libre repo for each of those PMs or would it be better to just package everything libre they provide in one place for one PM (pacman?)?

throgh wrote:

Perhaps this could be a project being supported from all libre distributions and with the help of the community.

You're right, it would be beneficial to have the software available in all libre distros, so repackaging everything for pacman seems like a bad idea (+ I recall Hyperbola's roadmap mentions removing unneeded stuff from the repo). A cross-distro PM is needed.

There's one interesting rant about PMs, that I believe hilights some problems well. Not that I agree with everything there wink