Maintainer: RPM to flatpak process requires modularity?

Project Discussion
1

I’ve asked the maintainer of the dino package in Fedora to provide a flatpak package of dino.

In order to build a Fedora Flatpak it is required to use modularity, as I understand it (if I’m wrong, please let me know.)

I had made a module for one of my packages to try it out and I found it to be a time intensive process to create and maintain modules. I don’t believe I can commit to creating (and more importantly, maintaining) a Fedora flatpak for Dino at this time due to the overhead of modularity.

I would be happy to help another packager get involved in Dino maintenance, however, if someone else were motivated to make it happen.

I’m just a user of Fedora however, so I don’t know whether that is true and what helps here, but I’d certainly very much like to see dino being available as a flatpak.

What I see here:

  • Is “modularity” really needed?
  • Can this process be simplified?
  • Also it seems this whole process is not documented very good. Can this be improved?
  • May someone of the be interested in helping/maintaining there?
2
  • The Fedora Flatpak doc: Flatpak :: Fedora Docs
  • I’m not an expert either here (I’m currently unsuccessfully trying to build Flatpaks for KDE Apps in Fedora) but I don’t think this requires modules.
  • An alternative (and probably easier) option is to submit the app to Flathub, a process I can help you or upstream with.
3

That’s good, I’ll let them know in the comments.

Well… dunno if it is easier, but it was tried and here is the issue/PR:

So this seems to be stuck… :thinking:

4

I have updated the Flatpak manifests but this is stuck on gpg support in Flatpak which is a much bigger topic. I’m afraid I won’t be working on that as I don’t use GPG.