Re: Flatpak Package
bill-auger <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.gnu.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20180414174357.7718f5fa@parabola> |
on the face of it, this interest in packaging GNU software could be seen as encouraging; but that i dont understand the motivation for doing this - if you do not use smalltalk yourself, and you dont know anyone who does, and the GNU smalltalk maintainers have not asked for this do you just go about finding random softwares to package for flatpack? if so, that sounds like you are flattering the flatpack project by adding smalltalk to it more than flattering smalltalk by packaging it for flatpack pardon my cynicism o/c - i dont speak for the project myself, but IMHO i am quite against that sort of "kitchen-sink" packaging _______________________________________________ help-smalltalk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 488 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE+8xa10IRl7erpyhTkIcQkT6Md3gFAlrSdh0ACgkQkIcQkT6M d3hXfQf+PvfT2XxDbHCm8fQZ73YGJ2nGIq+LGZEq+bSVXdiQ2RuOCBpK71/u9D11 xKa8iWhUbqYsBAYySnY5KtWDxuDcM94Bw71po0oBkXlaUejStjiYkIQsd9FGivlS RZYK0Vy86Vq0dmfTTwl0NxuqizUD0rMiv0pGlP+Q7d8pq0Vlpkh6qTbcGblojeol c4ub/2eu7UFF6BP5BxnDnnEnTMLpKPxfMRka47Z4LZSs58YSSDCUfmfodpTCAxxA e1o92fHbLgq2ekZu/LLqTQodgijMV4J37zciL0JaynsOXtAmvbIBo4wLtx9nnIos +uyFqQp5k6TUEpTRKTAgxNht95lV8A== =mj2O -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----