I'd say it solves it passably, in the simplest and most minimalistic way possible to still call them packages, technically. I question how one gets here, nay,

I'd say it solves it passably, in the simplest and most minimalistic way possible to still call them packages, technically. I question how one gets here, nay, the 'problem' we're solving. Presumably there's config management involved already capable of shipping bits. ie: the repo definitions to find these hackjob packages, or deliver them directly. If this is what you're willing to invest, go Slackware at it - use a tarball. You aren't gaining anything notable by throwing an archive at a packaging format. The meta that FPM ignores is what provides packages their value! If changelogs were at least a part of it, I'd be a bit more accepting. Otherwise, I see it mainly as misappropriation. Best case, naive and well served. Worst case, giving the impression of better distribution than actually exists An organization that does packages, but leaves this as the answer, fails itself and the members. Over 90% of the purpose is dutifully ignored/not standardized