3 ms·
> distributions want to take control of everything. I'm not sure where that's coming from. Distros/packagers (should) rightly feel a responsibility for a packa
by qwery 4y ago
> distributions want to take control of everything.
I'm not sure where that's coming from. Distros/packagers (should) rightly feel a responsibility for a packaged application's quality, security, interoperability.
> If a distribution just provided the necessary infrastructure to empower developers to maintain their own dependencies
To stick with the Arch Linux example in the article, is the flatpak you get from `# pacman -S flatpak` not suitable for some reason?
- iudqnolq 4y ago> I'm not sure where that's coming from. Distros/packagers (should) rightly feel a responsibility for a packaged application's quality, security, interoperability. This seems like false advertising. Ensuring an application is secure would require reading it's source. Based on maintainer complaints (like when that python package added a rust dependency) they don't seem to have the resources to even read all the changelogs.
- camgunz 4y agoIt's not really fair to extrapolate from this one instance you keep bringing up to all package maintenance everywhere. I think a more balanced assessment of the current situation would be that by and large the system works, there are 1000s of packages that are up to date, well-maintained and secure to the best of our knowledge, and they function in concert with each other. That's a big job!