Re: Proposal for reducing the number of unremovable apps in GNOME Software

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Allan Day <aday gnome org> wrote:
Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net> wrote:
> > I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable.
> >
> On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anything that's
> not a flatpak would be part of the image, and therefore unremovable?
> I've been looking at this issue recently from a slightly different
> perspective and wondered whether "part of the base OS" might be a
> simpler and more natural replacement for <mandatory_for_desktop>.

Seems to me that the whole problem is that gnome-software keeps the
"package" uninstallable even if the same application is installed via

Fix that, and you don't need to make any changes to the appdata files.

I'm thinking about a "pure" system that doesn't have any packages - it's just an ostree-based image with flatpaks installed on it. My understanding is that, in this situation, some apps would be shipped as part of the image, and that these apps wouldn't be removable.

That is really a side-effect of how the OS is deployed. If that is all this is about, we can remove all the 'mandatory' markings - things in the base image will not be removable anyway.
I would be in favor of that. Lets treat our users as grown-ups who can make their own decisions.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]