Bug 2181367

Proposed as a Blocker and Freeze Exception for 38-final by Fedora user asciiwolf using the blocker tracking app because:

 Since Fedora 38, there is an unfiltered Flathub repo added as a part of the Third-Party Repositories. As a requirement for this change to be accepted by FESCo, it was decided that Fedora RPMs will have priority over Flathub Flatpaks (and Fedora Flatpaks will have priority over both Flathub Flatpaks and Fedora RPMs). However, this does not seem to be the case with Fedora 38 Beta - Flathub Flatpaks still seem to have priority over Fedora RPMs (only Fedora Flatpaks seem to have the correct priority).

Created attachment 1953286 [details]
screenshot from gnome software showing scribus

It seems this bug affects randomly because with scribus, rpm shows first, but with other softwares no.

Created attachment 1953288 [details]
screenshot from gnome software showing scrummVM

As said by the reporter, in this case flathub comes first.

Created attachment 1953289 [details]
screenshot from gnome software showing gimp

Here at gimp it shows
Fedora flatpaks first
RPM second
Flathub thrid

Either way, it seems the priority aproved by fesco is not being respected by gnome software everytime, only sometimes.

Created attachment 1953291 [details]
screenshot from gnome software showing inkscape

Here the preference is Fedora flatpak => RPM =>flathub

BTW this is the version of gnome-software
gnome-software-44.0-1.fc38.x86_64

Created attachment 1953292 [details]
screenshot from gnome software showing gedit

With gedit the RPM is marked as default, fedora flatpak and flathub cames second and third.

Created attachment 1953293 [details]
screenshot from gnome software showing gitg

With gitg fedora flatpak is default, RPM and flathub came after.

Obs: I didn't check all the versions of the programs searched to see if it was selected using version number as a guide or not.

Thanks for a bug report. I'm not sure the screenshots were necessary, the problem is understandable even without them.

This needs a change on the packaging side, I'm on it.

As a proof of concept, you can run from a terminal:

   $ gsettings set org.gnome.software packaging-format-preference "['flatpak:fedora', 'rpm']"

This expects that the Fedora's flatpaks are provided from a `fedora` remote, which seems to be true for newly installed Fedora 38.

By the way, the order in the source selector popup does not matter, the idea is to preselect the proper source when an uninstalled app's details are viewed.

FEDORA-2023-49b5dec107 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-49b5dec107

> This expects that the Fedora's flatpaks are provided from a `fedora` remote, which seems to be true for newly installed Fedora 38.

They can also be from "fedora-testing" remote - that remote is pre-installed, but disabled by default.

(In reply to Kalev Lember from comment #12)
> They can also be from "fedora-testing" remote - that remote is
> pre-installed, but disabled by default.

Aha, hmm, do you want to promote those apps? I think it's like Updates Testing, right? Those might not be preferred over stable updates, no? I've no problem to add it, I only want to be sure it's desired.

Yep, it's similar to rpm updates-testing, which is already included in the priority order here ('rpm'). I think packages from updates-testing are actually even preferred over packages from regular updates because they usually have higher version numbers (but the user needs to enable updates-testing first for this to happen).

As for the fedora-testing flatpak remote, similarly, I think it makes sense to promote it if the user has opted in for them (which they do by enabling fedora-testing, similar to how they have to enable updates-testing). It doesn't really matter for most users because fedora-testing is disabled by default, but if someone enables it manually I think it just makes for a slightly nicer experience.

I have no idea which one should come first though - fedora or fedora-flatpak :)

(In reply to Kalev Lember from comment #14)
> I have no idea which one should come first though - fedora or fedora-flatpak
> :)

Fedora Flatpaks should be first, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UnfilteredFlathub#Detailed_Description

Yes, sorry, I typoed there. I wanted to say "I have no idea which one should come first though - fedora or fedora-testing". Both of these are Fedora Flatpaks remotes.

(In reply to Fedora Update System from comment #11)
> FEDORA-2023-49b5dec107 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-49b5dec107

Fix confirmed at my VM

FEDORA-2023-49b5dec107 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-49b5dec107

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2023-49b5dec107 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Okay, I added 'flatpak:fedora-testing' into the packaging-format-preference, before the 'flatpak:fedora'. I'm not going to create an update with it, it can wait for the 44.1 from my point of view.

Excellent, thanks!

(In reply to Milan Crha from comment #10)
> By the way, the order in the source selector popup does not matter, the idea
> is to preselect the proper source when an uninstalled app's details are
> viewed.

I opened [1] to make the order respect the packaging format preference. The code was there, the alternative apps were sorted by it, but then the list box re-sorted them by name.

[1] https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-software/-/merge_requests/1666