On Mon, Oct 19, 2026 at 7:42 PM Wookey <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2026-10-19 17:58 -0500, Aaron Rainbolt wrote: > > >More likely I would > >expect the app to only be present in Unstable like VirtualBox, and at > >that point it's probably easier for both Debian and upstream if the > >browser is not added to Debian's repos. There are lots of other, > >easier ways to distribute apps for Debian (AppImage, Flatpak, > >third-party deb, Snap, tarball full of binaries, etc.). > > Those methods may be easier for developers/upstreams, but they are not > easier for users. Actual packaged software in the archive is easier > for users. Obviously maintainability and security updates are > important, and the packager (upstream in this case) needs to > understand what is required for a package in the archive, but I don't > think we should be prematurely discouraging packaging just because > other distribution mechanisms exist.
It's not just because other distribution mechanisms exist though. Debian's stable release architecture, while very useful, simply does not play well with rapid-release software that has to keep pace with a rapidly changing ecosystem. Applications in that category will become difficult to use over time at best, and dreadfully insecure at worst. I think it's "easier" (in the sense of "causes less headache later") for users to get such applications from sources other than Debian, unless Debian wants to offer the needed exceptions to allow that software to be maintained despite "breaking the rules" like it does with major Web browsers. -- Aaron > > Wookey > -- > Principal hats: Wookware, Debian > http://wookware.org/ > Matrix: @wookey:matrix.org
