Flatpak already has an established security model.
You are not a Flatpak core developer, so you have absolutely no idea whether they decide if different applications from the same vendor will at some point be allowed to access each others data.
Your statement is pointless
It’s not pointless to think about possible future decisions a crucial piece of software might have to make. I also replied to a question from OP, so it’s not your decision what is pointless and what isn’t anyway.
and you are rude.
If you think that being an uninvited “But actually” comment isn’t rude, you have a skewed sense of reality. I was answering a question from OP, not yours. You’re the one who engaged with that attitude. Look in the mirror before making accusations.
Edit: Blocking you now. Not engaging with a brat any longer.
You are not a Flatpak core developer, so you have absolutely no idea whether they decide if different applications from the same vendor will at some point be allowed to access each others data.
It’s not pointless to think about possible future decisions a crucial piece of software might have to make. I also replied to a question from OP, so it’s not your decision what is pointless and what isn’t anyway.
If you think that being an uninvited “But actually” comment isn’t rude, you have a skewed sense of reality. I was answering a question from OP, not yours. You’re the one who engaged with that attitude. Look in the mirror before making accusations.
Edit: Blocking you now. Not engaging with a brat any longer.
Looks you’re talking about flathub, not flatpak…
So flatpak itself does not enforce the use of the reverse DNS naming scheme?
Flatpak uses a . separator for namespaces. Mostly because DBus does.
The association with a real domain is a Flathub policy.