Flatpaks on SFOS

AFAI understand lipstick -which is open source???- needs to be updated to support xdg-shell. Everyone has moved away from wl-shell.

Other than that i am not in favor at all of fucking up the user experience with non native stuff. It only makes matters worst.

That's maybe not that easy. It sits on top of QtWayland which we have version 5.4, according to mailing list info. Don't know when xdg-shell was introduced and how to enable it.

As for keeping native look - I agree, that's better. Reasons for going for enabling flatpak support are several: get access to the latest Qt API (5.12, 5.13, and probably 5.14 soon); ability to use apps developed for other Linux platforms before porting to SFOS. Major advantage of getting latest Qt is access to the toolbox that can be used to write mobile-oriented web browser using latest engines. As many on official devices use Android browsers for it, I think having non-native looking but decent browser maybe better alternative.

PS: take my comments regrading Wayland extensions with a salt - I am not specialist in the area

From my experience with wayland on the desktop QT was kind of late to support the newer protocol (xdg6). 5.10 was when it started to work and it had bugs and stuff. So you'll have to overcome this. As for how to use xdg6 it is supposed to use it by default if your qt version is new. Didn't notice anything really weird with Qt apps lately on the desktop.

And yes the browser remains the biggest issue with SFOS. I am partial to firefox for many reasons. However i don't expect a Native looking firefox to come any time soon™.

Then you have more experience than I do. Do you know what's a difference between "xdg-shell-v6" or "xdg-shell" and maybe you know when they were introduced?

AFAI understand -which might be totally NOT correct- xdg-shell has (or had) various versions and 6 is the latest which is what desktop compositors support at this point. Or it might be called stable nowadays.

On Qt the support was added in 5.10 for sure.