https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=468805
Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |s...@debian.org
--- Comment #2 from Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> ---
[I am a Flatpak contributor, but not a regular Plasma user.]
> Too bad those portals don't use the same overrides config file
That's partly because the overrides for sandbox parameters (the equivalent of
`flatpak override` in the CLI) are "owned" by Flatpak and are unique to
Flatpak, whereas the permission store (the equivalent of `flatpak permissions`
etc. in the CLI) is "owned" by xdg-desktop-portal and shared between
Flatpak/Snap/anything else.
This is extra-confusing because people use the word "permission" informally to
describe both, but the Flatpak manual pages seem to be making a point of not
using the word "permission" for the sandbox parameters.
The sandbox parameter overrides are described as "overrides" because the
typical use for them is to override the features for which the app author has
said "this app won't work properly unless allowed to...", so they're
advanced/risky/can very easily break apps. In the opposite direction, it's also
very easy for configuring sandbox parameter overrides to give the app much
wider access than you intended it to.
It doesn't seem great that flatpak-kcm displays the sandbox parameters and
encourages users to override them, but without exposing the safer and more
normal-to-edit permission store settings - that seems like the wrong way round.
I'd also prefer it if permission-store configuration had more emphasis (e.g. at
the top), with the overrides labelled as "advanced" or similar.
https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/issues/5427 is an example of a situation
where access to the permission store would have been useful. The particular
permission store item that was relevant to that issue (the "run in background"
permission) is available in GNOME's Settings (the equivalent of
systemsettings), which intentionally *doesn't* expose the equivalent of
`flatpak override`, leaving that to more advanced tools.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
