The undermentioned explains:
The undermentioned elaborates on one point:
However, the undermentioned confuses me, if they’re accurate:
It’s correct to use a different ID in the sense that we don’t allow arbitrary branches. Apps in Flathub beta must have beta as their branch, and apps in Flathub stable must have stable as their branch. (Firefox has an exemption from this check but still)
But you are right, doing a org.mozilla.firefox//nightly is technically possible with Flatpak and close to a channel feature.
The problem with multiple branches is that you have to manually start them from the CLI if you have multiple branches installed.
2 Likes
@bbhtt, so Flatpak supports any amount of arbitrary branches, but this is determined by the repository? If so, does the application determine this when it’s locally installed from a .flatpak (rather than .flatpakref)?
That is painful. No wonder so few appear to utilise them. 
Regardless, I don’t much understand how this differentiates them from “channels”. Is my confusion because such functionality doesn’t exist in Flatpak?
Well how do you define “channels”? From my point of view, branches are channels.
@bbhtt, Of course, your description of branches is equivalent to snapd’s --channel feature in effect. That’s why I asked: I was under the impression that two separate features existed, one labelled “channels”, and the other labelled “branches”, which appeared to serve duplicate purposes.
No, Flatpak never had anything called “channels”
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 2 days. New replies are no longer allowed.