If Fedora wants to promote FOSS then it would make sense to just have it’s users enable Flathub if they want to. Instead of outright promote a repository that promotes proprietary software.
If you meant it as moral question, then then answer would probably be that proprietary software does’nt guarantee the same user freedoms as free software. And thus does’nt let users control the software that runs on their own computers.
Oh yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for the info. I was under the impression that Flathub was a default flatpak repo in Fedora anyway.
But yes, always with these trade-offs. It’s bad when package maintainers package software, and it’s bad when software developers package software…
Why is Fedora packaging their own flatpak of OBS in the first place, when a seemingly working, official one is available on Flathub?
Great decision! Not only does this make Tumbleweed match MicroOS better, but also the RHEL-based distros. SELinux is not super obvious to use, of course, but I’ve never understood how AppArmor works.
I definitely do not hate SELinux, I think it’s a great system. But my experience mostly (at home, anyway) comes from managing servers running Kubernetes clusters and, like, just using podman do deploy containers. In both these cases SELinux is a on “just works” basis, for the most part.
Then in enterprise environment that doesn’t run everything on containers, you usually have a very standardized way of applying SELinux policies. At my last place of work we did it via a rather Ansible role. It was simple and easy.
But I can imagine using SELinux at home, where you maybe don’t have these things, might be a rather “mysterious” experience. It’s not the most obvious system.
But learning to write your own policies (even if just trough se2allow or whatever it’s called) does de-mystify SELinix pretty quick.