Well, sorry to get all steamed up. But what I can't get over is why? Why would StoneColdSpider start this going? He has some loco motive!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: StoneColdSpiderI prefer my games to have a little more freedom...... This game seems to be ON RAILS....... :wink::tongue:

Aagh! If you can't CONDUCT yourself with a bit more decorum, Liam might have to ask you to leave!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: enigmaxg2

Quoting: Purple Library GuyFunny, I realized that my expectations have flipped. For a long time I was always impressed that games were just running out of the box with Proton.
At this point it's kind of impressive that people are still managing to make games in such a way that they break on Proton.

As more games become DX12-only, things are becoming worse again.

Ehhh, probably not for very long. As I understand it, DX12 is a lot like Vulkan, so the translation layer should be easier than the other ones, will probably mature faster.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Funny, I realized that my expectations have flipped. For a long time I was always impressed that games were just running out of the box with Proton.
At this point it's kind of impressive that people are still managing to make games in such a way that they break on Proton.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Julius

Quoting: tfk

Quoting: Julius

Quoting: tfkTake KDE plasma for instance. The KDE team built it on top of Telerik's Qt. That one is open source as long as your application is free of charge. When you want to go commercial then you have to pay for a license. Not exactly OSS but it works for the KDE team.

This is outdated by around two decades. What rock have you been living under? qt is fully FOSS. It just *also* has a commercial edition.

And sure some Unity projects might be able to recycle this script code, but that doesn't make the game itself open-source. The engine is by far the largest part of the game and it is not even shared-source like the Unreal engine.

"qt is fully FOSS. It just *also* has a commercial edition."

Hahaha 😆 yeah sure Juli. Go read some licenses first before you come up with non-arguments.

Seriously, read them yourself. Nothing in the licensing of the qt community edition prevents commercial use. Your are completly out of date with your FUD.

Yeah, Julius is totally right here. I remember back when there was the whole thing about KDE not being properly Free Software because of QT, and I remember when QT's licensing changed and it stopped being an issue.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: benstor214

Quoting: WMan22I'm one of the seemingly few people who actually welcomes mod.io

mod.io is tencent

And?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

In the trailer it was interesting the way groups of, um, buildings, would all sort of pop up at once; I'm wondering how you set up for that to happen. Also some of the big floaty things looked cool, and I blinked when your character apparently walked into building A and got zooped along its green laser thingie to building B.
Seems kind of neat.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The word "dangerous" often reminds me of this song [External Link].

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: pleasereadthemanual

Quoting: Purple Library GuyOr I guess if there were open source applications that I needed, that were not available from my distro but were available from Flathub, I'd grumble and use it. But for most stuff I would prefer to use traditional package management integrated with my distro, and I will be unhappy if there is a general trend away from existing package management and I end up having to install everything as Flatpaks.

When I tried Fedora recently, I found the version of Anki offered in the official repositories was from 2-3 years ago. On Arch, I use the version of Anki built from the AUR, which also includes a much newer version of the database.

The only other ways to install Anki are through pip, the official binary installer on the website (not a great experience), or through Flatpak. The Flatpak way is quite easy. I assume most other distributions have an outdated version of Anki too, because they got sick of packaging it. I think FreeBSD is the only exception (and from memory, I believe most packagers were relying on the FreeBSD packager's work).

I know the one arena Flatpaks won't replace distribution-built packages is system-level packages like Linux, bash, and glibc. Installing browsers using Flatpak is also a dumb idea. [External Link]

But...if it ever does get to that point, know that Gentoo, Nix and GNU Guix will welcome you with open arms :P

Thing is, stuff like this suggests to me that what things like Flatpak are supposed to solve is quite different from what Flatpaks apparently do solve. If things that were packaged by distros end up getting packaged as Flatpaks, because packagers find they prefer packaging things as Flatpaks, because it's easier to do, that says the problem with existing package management systems is not the results but how easy they are to use from the packaging end.
The obvious solution would seem to be to make existing package management systems easier to package things with, and more automatable. Maybe there's some technical/theoretical reason why that's impossible, I dunno.

I'm just saying, if the reason users are ending up using Flatpaks isn't because they're more maintainable or because users are clamouring for sandboxing but just because there are newer packages, which in turn is because packaging debs or whatever is just harder/slower to do, then the solution isn't so much Flatpaks it's making packaging debs or whatever easier and faster.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Personally, I like Flatpaks as a concept, I feel they're appropriate for a significant niche, but I've never actually used one. If I want an app (that isn't a game), I get it from my distro, which, being Mint, has a nice easy GUI for software installation. I guess my needs aren't all that specialized. And that way it gets automatically updated, in ways that don't create conflicts, and I generally don't have to worry about it, and if I ever want to uninstall one that is very easy to do.

So for regular open source applications, Flathub is solving a problem I don't have, with a solution that is slightly more labour intensive than my existing approach. If there were closed source applications that I needed, that weren't games, I can see getting them from Flathub. Or I guess if there were open source applications that I needed, that were not available from my distro but were available from Flathub, I'd grumble and use it. But for most stuff I would prefer to use traditional package management integrated with my distro, and I will be unhappy if there is a general trend away from existing package management and I end up having to install everything as Flatpaks.

View this comment - View article - View full comments