Thread: Purism Librem Phone
View Single Post
Zeta is offline Zeta
2018-03-04 , 12:55
Posts: 339 | Thanked: 1,623 times | Joined on Oct 2013 @ France
#292
Originally Posted by marmistrz View Post
Exactly, three questions I'd like Purism to answer
1. What's wrong with Qt Quick? QtQuick Controls 2 are meant especially for mobile and are developed for a really long time?
2. What's wrong with whatever compositor Plasma Mobile/SailfishOS/Nemo Mobile use?
3. What's wrong with apt/yum/zypper/pacman or whatever Alpine uses that they want to go for flatpak? Why O(n) copies of libstdc++? (if my understanding of flatpak is correct) Who is going to update the dependencies when there's a CVE?
For the question 1, I think they have nothing against it. On the contrary.
Looking at the blog post https://puri.sm/posts/gnome-and-kde-...cross-devices/, they said they want to support both KDE and Gnome on the phone, to give users a choice.
They added:
KDE is very far along with their “Plasma” mobile desktop environment, while GNOME is farther behind currently
So confirming that KDE plasma and so the underlying Qt frameworks is already good enough, which is not the case for GTK on mobile.

So why spending time working on GTK ? They justified it like that:
Since Purism uses GNOME as the default desktop environment within PureOS on our laptops, we figured we are going to invest some direct development efforts in GNOME/GTK+ for mobile to stay consistent across our default platforms. Adding KDE as a second desktop environment is directly aligned with our beliefs, and we are very excited to support KDE/Plasma on our Librem 5 phone as well as within PureOS for all our hardware. We will support additional efforts, if they align with our strict beliefs.
That's just two quotes out of the full article I found that illustrate correctly their will, please read it all to have their full explanation.

As for the question 2 about the compositor, they have not explained it fully, except:
For a number of reasons—and after having evaluated several possible choices with upstream project maintainers—, we set out to develop a compositor and shell based on Wlroots and Rootston.
So it looks like they asked themselves the question before wanting to reinvent the wheel. Would be really interesting to see what those reasons were.

For the question 3, flatpak doesn't replace a package manager. There will be one (I can point to a Fosdem presentation where they explain that flatpak is only designed for standalone applications, not system packages). The question is only if they will make flatpak mandatory for app deployment, or only keeping that possible by making the system compatible as a lot of things may be moving to flatpak in the coming years.

my 2 cents...
 

The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Zeta For This Useful Post: