2 ms·
I'd prefer vendoring approach to all packages. I don't care about disk space or traffic, but I care about pinning precise dependency versions. I'd even say, I'd
by vbezhenar 3y ago
I'd prefer vendoring approach to all packages. I don't care about disk space or traffic, but I care about pinning precise dependency versions. I'd even say, I'd prefer to virtualize every application in a docker manner. That's what I mostly do with server applications using docker or k8s and it works for me. There's no reason it wouldn't work with desktop applications.
- worksonmine 3y agoI agree for projects I maintain, where I can bump a package and the dependencies myself. But on a server with 10 services, depending on 10 versions of a badly maintained project that requires an urgent security patch? Not so much, I rather just update a shared lib. It's a matter of scale and resources. The great thing is that there are options, Flatpaks do what you want, no need to demand that Debian does the same.
- tremon 3y agoIf you don't care about disk space or traffic, does that mean that other people who do care about it are automatically wrong? What about people who care about software security and want to know which vulnerable versions of which software exist on their servers or desktops? here's no reason it wouldn't work with desktop applications Have you tried it with desktop applications?