<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>akerro</author><text>There are several linux distros, I&amp;#x27;m a single OSS developer. I once tried making my program available for Debian (deb), Ubuntu (ppa) and Fedora (rpm). I ended up supporting only AUR. There are too many differences in packaging managers, different requirements, too many websites I have to register on, too many config files for each distro. Support from people who work as packagers is non-existent, questions on SO out of date, error and warning from packaging software misleading or completely useless. It&amp;#x27;s a huge mess, and if you think existing system is better than Flatpak&amp;#x2F;Snap&amp;#x2F;AppImage, I&amp;#x27;m sure you haven&amp;#x27;t tried porting your software to top 6 distributions. Also, enjoy dependency hell, Debian has old Qt and PA, Mint has PA compiled without noise-cancelling flags, Ubuntu had SQLite3 with not working encryption, Fedora had backported Qt5 patch (old Qt with latest patch) witch fixed one issue, but broke CSS on Cancel&amp;#x2F;OK button group.&lt;p&gt;I welcome AppImage and Flatpak.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ddevault</author><text>Ready to ruin the security of Linux, you mean. The split between package vendor and package maintainer has classically been the primary reason for malware being rare on Linux. Getting maintainers out of the loop for auditing packages, ensuring security updates go out, etc - is an &lt;i&gt;awful&lt;/i&gt; idea. Sandboxing applications is great, but it can be done without subverting the package manager.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Flatpak 1.0 Released, Ready for Prime Time</title><url>https://flatpak.org/press/2018-08-20-flatpak-1.0/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>nickik</author><text>The split might have some amount of minimal value, but it also has many problems. Just the insane amount of work spent, by literally 100s of different communities is almost beyond insane.&lt;p&gt;Massive amount of identical work that the WASTE majority of the time, does not improve anything for the end user.&lt;p&gt;Security should come from moving into well maintained platform, automatic scanners and many users. Instead of the package maintainers being the &amp;#x27;security reviewers&amp;#x27; we should have app stores and sub repositories with security reviews.&lt;p&gt;Nothing stops a distro from only offering flatpaks from their own repo.&lt;p&gt;Centralizing and automating these things will allow for far better security processes in the long run.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ddevault</author><text>Ready to ruin the security of Linux, you mean. The split between package vendor and package maintainer has classically been the primary reason for malware being rare on Linux. Getting maintainers out of the loop for auditing packages, ensuring security updates go out, etc - is an &lt;i&gt;awful&lt;/i&gt; idea. Sandboxing applications is great, but it can be done without subverting the package manager.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Flatpak 1.0 Released, Ready for Prime Time</title><url>https://flatpak.org/press/2018-08-20-flatpak-1.0/</url></story>