It is a hard pill to take.

There is no god on Wayland.

NixOS learning curve maybe is not so hard. You can start with default configurations and installed Calamares what is as simple as on other distros. Than look for options and try.

Otherwise, Flatpaks are reproducible (build with flatpak-builder as on Flathub).

I’m sick of all the attempts to whitewash the recent Red Hat move. This makes things only worse. Fedora will not be affected, Alma has a bright future, CentOS is open to all, “rebuilders”, clones…

Major: Debian, Gentoo, NixOS, Arch and also FreeBSD (not GNU/Linux but still).

Other and esoteric: Void, Alpine, Solus, CRUX, Slackware, Mageia/OpenMandriva,

Corporate sponsored: Fedora, openSUSE

Sun is now Oracle anyway.

BTW there was a nice idea behind the only close button in early GNOME 3. Apps were intended to save the state on exit, so one doesn’t need to minimize windows, they can close it and reopen at any time and see the exact content of a window. But GNOME completely has failed to deliver that idea.

What makes things worse, there was no clear way to keep apps on the background when the main window is closed. It was seemed as antifeature. But that was a different world where weren’t so much of internet service applications running on the background 24h a day. Now there is a background portal but with quite minimal support in the DE.

Maybe it’s just a general habit of mine that I keep minimum things open at time and close everything after use: desktop windows, android apps, browser tabs. So I use up to 3-5 dynamic workspaces most of the time.

I switch between apps from overview or by typing in search, or by sliding between workspaces. It is more convenient to me than classic desktops with a taskbar and minimized windows.

I don’t believe it will work. To do so it requires to maintain their own repository of RPM specs for a stable release distro. In this case Alma will became an active independent distro downstream to Fedora and CentOS Stream, and could steal the focus from RHEL. I don’t think RH will allow that. Not to say I requires significant effort and Alma is a small community funded project. It’s to good to be true and I have skepticism about the positive attitude of the blog post.

I guess RH tries to “embrace” Alma and Rocky as it was with CentOS.

Always has been.

But to be fair, openSUSE was my first linux distro after Windows and YaST had been helpful to me before I learned how to use console commands. And then I switched to another distro.

I you are asking about permissions so yes. I often limit access filesystem paths, dbus proxy, devices and network.

Flatpak was started by RH employee but has been developed with significant community effort.

Flatpak uses ostree, which was originally created in GNOME for GNOME OS. And GNOME has contributors not only from RH but form Endless, Collabora, Purism and others.

Flatpak can work with OCI remotes, this is what RH more interested in. And Flathub uses only ostree. OCI remotes are used in Fedora Flatpaks repacked from fedora packages with the runtime based on fedora. But who use it anyway.

Flathub itself is independent community effort. It uses org.freedesktop.Platform based runtimes which are not based on any distro.

XDG Portals are shaped by Flathub maintainers and applications developers where RH also doesn’t play significant role.

I use flatpaks mostly. Flatpak dependencies (runtimes) are stored separately from the host system so and don’t bloat my system with unwanted libraries and binaries. App data and configs are stored separately and better organized. Everything runs in sanboxes. I use overrides extensively. All these are very convenient for me.

Where can I track package versions without installing? https://packages.debian.org/trixie/ and https://packages.debian.org/unstable/ show outdated packages.

The problem with Debian testing is that packages are not fresh, neither packages are fresh in sid. So, Debian is not a replacement for rolling distros like Arch Linux or openSUSE Thumbleweed

As alternative to the RHEL and its clones maybe. But there is no alternative to Fedora in Debian (with exception to Ubuntu and derivatives) family, even Sid consists from outdated packages.

And ChromeOS is even more popular.

What you see when you upload files is not a FM but an open file dialog. Yeah, it sucks. Maybe it’s worth to play with xdg-desktop-portal and alternative fronteds: e.g. xdg-desktop-portal-kde. But I don’t know if it’s better.

To go x86_64-only was a mistake for Arch. Distros like Fedora or Debian, or openSUSE have universal building systems and infrastructure for building packages for different architectures. Arch just creates unnecessary fragmentation for the GNU/Linux landscape: software need to be packaged for the distro and for the same time PKGBUILDs cannot be reused in general for anything to go full Arch Linux. Not for other architectures, not for servers or LTS. Only for a x86_64 desktop niche. Arch Linux doesn’t scale.