Re: [Evolution] Have I pushed Evolution beyond where it is designed to go?

[Paul Smith <paul mad-scientist net>]

On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 20:09 +0100, Ralf Mardorf via evolution-list
wrote:
> it was pointed out several times that Evolution downgrades are
> sometimes a problem regarding the user data/settings. Downgrades of
> any software can suffer from this issues.

Of course.  I didn't mean to suggest that somehow flatpak would handle
this; it's not magic.

However, since the OP is using IMAP, GMail, and Exchange none of which
store any critical data locally, you don't need to try to downgrade the
user settings.  You can downgrade the software then recreate the
accounts and not have lost anything (I've done similar things a number
of times over the years).

> Flatpaks and similar approaches make some things easier for users,
> but other things harder and they even don't solve all existing
> problems related to upgrades and downgrades.

I'm not sure what you had in mind when you say "other things harder",
but to me "make some things easier" can be worthwhile even IF it
doesn't "solve all existing problems".  Luckily I'm not waiting for
something that solves all existing problems, or I'd never use anything.

Look, to be clear, if I have the choice between installing Evolution
natively from my distro versus the same version of Evolution in a
flatpak, I'll certainly choose the native distro version.

That's not what we're talking about.

We're talking about either a 2+-year-old version of Evolution from my
distro that doesn't do what I need, versus a much newer version of
Evolution in a flatpak, versus trying to build and install it myself. 
I've been down that road before.

I'm saying that flatpak is a perfectly reasonable technology and I've
seen no real, practical problems with it that would prevent me from
using it, or from recommending that others who need it use it as well.
I HAVE seen a lot of people quite het up about it, but none of the
reasons given (when reasons are given) seem that important to me.