If I want to distribute an application that relies on other charts, I should not have to include them in mine. It's like saying "you can build your own apt rep

If I want to distribute an application that relies on other charts, I should not have to include them in mine. It's like saying "you can build your own apt repository and embed your dependencies in your .deb package". This is not a viable/scalable solution. This is exactly the tar.gz on Slackware. The key point here is that I don't want to deploy an application, I want to distribute it to others so they can deploy it. And the more requirements you have, the more complex your installation procedure become. Which is error-prone and can be a barrier for adoption. If I want to distribute a .deb, I can specify dependencies from the distribution's repository. I don't need to take care of that myself, and I do not need to tell my users how to get the dependency, it will be the package manager's role (apt, dnf, ...).