Honestly? I'm a fan of Flatpaks where they make sense. I'm also okay with Appimages. Native is pretty cool. Whatever gets the thing to run really.

I like to use the terminal to update my applications, it's just faster. I have an alias to run an update for native packages and flatpaks. You can use your GUI of choice. Or not, it's up to you. It's that sort of freedom that I love about using Linux.

In some cases, Flatpak actually helps, as in my case, with Prism Launcher. Some of my system libraries cause issues with a handful of mods, but the libraries distributed with the Flatpak get that working. Hopefully that's not foreshadowing more future library-related issues.

I'm relatively new to Linux. I honestly don't see what the problem is.

I am definitely a fan. A lot of people say that flatpaks are bad because of sandboxing but I haven't seemed to have any issues with it.

Although I do try to use dnf when a dnf package is available (I use fedora)

theyre whatever, they have their place in my system, but inprefer installing debs from the repo

Furniture? Integrated circuit packaging?

That reminds me, is Flatpak packaging CLI tools already?

Is that supposed to be Ed Norton, or just an uncanny coincidence?

Honestly, I am a little scarred from snap.

Otherwise I'm agnostic on flatpaks - I've used a couple and they're ok? They just remind me of old windows games that dump all their libraries in a folder with them.

On a modern system the extra space and loss of optimisation is ok, but on older hardware or when you're really trying to push your system to run something it technically shouldn't, I can see it being an issue.

there's a gui for flatpaks?

Just another tool in the toolbox. Use it or not, up to the user. I've even seen Slackware users who say they use Flatpak to ward off dependency rabbit holes.

I like the sandboxing of Flatpak, but I prefer AppImage as I don't like having the Flatpak runtime requirement.