@sir One of the major features of Flatpak is using container technology to make sure no matter the distro, the package is running in the same environment as the developer's machine, so there is no need to "tune for the environment."
For the anti-feature point, if you have problems with the source, you should fork it, not pretend you are distributing the app while in reality you are distributing something else.

@cagatayy @sir Hate to bang the Guix/Nix pan all the time (no i don't) but what you want is reproducable packages/environments, not containers.

@sir @cagatayy Well, it's a much more usable rolling release distro than any other I've tried. Guix, that is. Nix's tools could be better.
And its developers aren't elitists who joke about mentally ill homeless people.
Call me when another distro gets an equivalent of `guix environment`.

@sir @cagatayy NixOS maybe, but Guix is not that complicated, nor are its developers or users FP elitists. But even Nix solved some very real problems that establishes package managers of the time failed to address.

@sir @cagatayy As someone who had pacman fuck up their bootloader due to a power outage, I welcomed anything that makes updates atomic. And being able to have conflicting versions of packages is also nice.

@sir @cagatayy It also makes parametric packages easy to work with. And the functional purity means you can provide binary caches for package variants. Undeclared dependencies not affecting build output is quite useful.

@sir @cagatayy
Ah well. I think most people will like them.