Flathub, initial proposal

[Alexander Larsson]

On tis, 2016-09-27 at 12:03 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Alexander Larsson 
> 
> > 
> > On tis, 2016-09-27 at 11:01 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > 
> > > ]] Alexander Larsson 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >                      apps   builds   repo size  avg build size
> > > > gnome-apps stable:   24     474      38 GB      82 MB
> > > > gnome-apps unstable: 30     1222     60 GB      50 MB
> > > > nightly builds:  
> > > >    6      59       3.6GB      62 MB
> > > > 
> > > > Total average build size: 59 MB
> > > > 
> > > > This is a pretty decent variation of apps, architectures, level
> > > > of
> > > > file sharing etc, so its probably an OK estimate.
> > > These numbers look like pretty well-behaved clients who are
> > > minimising
> > > the size of the pak well. I think that if we open this to lots of
> > > folks,
> > > we'll see that size explode, though.  Not sure how public it's
> > > intended
> > > to be?
> > You mean intentionally exploiting it? Or just accidentally getting
> > lots
> > of dependencies in the apps? We do want to open it up to the
> > general
> > public. I mean, thats the point, to make it easier for people to
> > make
> > and distribute flatpak apps without having to be sysadmins.
>
> The latter.  I suspect you'll find people who accidentially pull in
> half
> the world for their app (see some of the behemoths people are ending
> up
> with for their docker containers, even though you can build fairly
> minimal ones).

Its somewhat harder as you actually have to set up builds for all the
dependencies, so you don't accidentally pull in texlive and all its
package dependencies, etc.

> > Maybe we can have some sort of per-user quotas? Although quotas
> > make it
> > hard to do things like hardlink sharing.
> Yeah, quotas suck in many ways.
> 
> We could see if we can get a storage array from somewhere, but I
> suspect
> just getting a donation from amazon or google of storage space in a
> cloud would be easier.

I don't really know how these things go, but yeah, that seems like a
much simpler approach than having real hardware. That said, we still
need it to work like a local filesystem for ostree to work on it, and
ostree has lots of small files, so its not necessarily a great fit for
many network filesystems. For instance, it probably works badly on
glusterfs.

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Alexander Larsson                                            Red Hat, Inc 
       alexl at redhat.com            alexander.larsson at gmail.com 
He's an unconventional voodoo senator with acid for blood. She's a 
radical mute snake charmer from a different time and place. They fight 
crime!