Yes, but then it becomes their problem to get everything right in the flatpak. So, more work for the developer.
Again, there is no answer to this question. It all comes down to circumstance and developer preference.
Packaging formats are almost a religious debate and the idea that in the future we are all moving to any standard is never going to happen.
That being said, some people will. Others won’t. It is what it is.
Yes it’s more work, but at least it is only the dev doing it for one package that runs on all distros, and the maintainers have even less work other than posting them to the repos.
So, ultimately, what is the point you are trying to make?
This is just going in circles like these debates always do.
2nd comment on this thread
Well, I agree the answer is no answer, at least for now.
I just spun up a VM of Fedora and will try their version of Flatpak.
Happy Sunday.
Listening to user experience in a Linux User Group I’m a part of, it seems Fedora has the best flatpak experience. Good luck exploring
I think you will find it is the same as everyone else’s version.
That without a universal distro agnostic containerized package manager, we will have less titles to choose from. So Flatpak, Snap or whatever had better succeed or Linux may not enjoy much past its present 2% of penetration.
Since it’s only mods that have engaged, feel free to close the thread.
I use Fedora quite a lot and haven’t noticed any differences in the flatpak experience. They a small repo of curated flatpaks but most people just use flathub anyway.
There is almost no chance that Linux will ever have a universal distro-agnostic package manager. There is simply too much freedom for that. Even all the distros agreed to use the same packaging standards, someone would immediately create a new distro that didn’t use those standards.
If that is your wish.