flatpaks VS winepak

See example here, this, and also.

p.s. This is how a real full FFmpeg build looks like. Note the extra dependencies.

This needs to be on Flathub. I created an initial Flatpak manifest here. You should consider renaming the app id to org.rncbc.qpwgraph, as you already own the domain.

You most likely can do this via Podman/toolbox. I haven't tried this with Silverblue, my daily driver is Arch Linux, but it's also immutable, so I put the whole libvirt stack in a Docker/Podman image, and I also have virt-manager packaged as a Flatpak. It's very much a WIP, and only rootful, non-privileged, host network namespace is tested and confirmed working. Also be aware that at least with the Fedora image, rootful and privileged broke my host, as I probably need to mask some systemd services/targets in the container.

Why not? I'm personally using a couple of TUI apps myself that I packaged. There are a few limitations in Flatpak affecting TUI apps, but if it's a single executable app, then Flatpak package can work great for it.

Example app: Notepad++

There's no Fuse support in the Flatpak, this needs the setuid bit set and run as root, so the AppImage cannot run in the sandbox. We can extract the AppImage and repackage it as a Flatpak, and I believe that there are more than a couple of Flathub apps that does this. Here's an example.

Adding to @Popular-Egg-3746's comment, it should be noted that libimobiledevice's libs & tools can definitely work when packaged in Flatpak, you just need usbmuxd daemon running on the host, and distros like Fedora Silverblue/Kinoite are shipping it pre-installed. I actually packaged ifuse as a Flatpak, and used it a little, see.

For anything other than games, you need the Collabora fork. I'm building this as Flatpak app, see here. DXVK is not included, as Vulkan wasn't supported in the Wayland branch when I initially packaged Wine. I believe that now Vulkan should work.

I have them packaged here.

I don't know, both flatpak-wine and winepak seems to not be adopted en-masse.

Theoretically, you can do either a Winepak / winepak-x86_64 or a PrismLauncher/FFXIVLauncher/a-certain-game-launcher release of LoL to give it a Flatpak release.

The reason being that there is literally no point to duplicating flathub just to have your own repo, why waste computing resources. If you want to host a special build of apps that aren't on flathub, then yeah, people are hosting their own remotes. See this one, this one and this one.

Ehm no, that is not correct. https://github.com/winepak/winepak