Add flatpak support

[ea7ababe]

• Added a flatpak manifest and some other files under the flatpak/ directory:
  • Makefile - has rules to regenerate go-sources.json, modules.txt and js-sources.json
  • app.winboat.Winboat.metainfo.xml - flatpak metadata
  • app.winboat.Winboat.yml - flatpak manifest
  • go-sources.json - guest server dependencies
  • js-sources.json - main app dependencies
  • modules.txt - guest server modules file for go vendor
• Changed execFile* calls to be flatpak-aware, they now use flatpak-spawn when inside flatpak to call external programs (docker/podman and xfreerdp aren't shipped with the bundle).
• Added a CI job to build a flatpak bundle.

This isn't really Flathub-ready because of the use of flatpak-spawn (although, some apps that use it do get accepted, so I dunno), but it would be convenient to at least provide flatpak bundles from this github repository, as the current installation options do not work on, e.g. GNU Guix (appimages don't work there, not without hacks anyway).

[waffles-dev]

Thanks for this - haven't had a chance to go through it all yet but at a glance it looks high quality.

I think we're ok if the flatpak is podman only.

@tulilirockz mentioned a while back that podman-remote might be the way forward for flatpak, not sure exactly what her intention was for that approach though. I don't have any real working knowledge of flatpaks nor flathubs publishing requirements.

[auri-f5bde6]

@tulilirockz mentioned a while back that podman-remote might be the way forward for flatpak, not sure exactly what her intention was for that approach though. I don't have any real working knowledge of flatpaks nor flathubs publishing requirements.

I think, (but I'm not sure) the idea is to ship podman with the app in the flatpak, and expose the host podman socket to flatpak. Then podman inside the flatpak can use podman remote to connect to the socket.

[auri-f5bde6]

Also it might be a good idea to wait for #515 before dealing with flatpak. I think
But nice work!

[ea7ababe]

Food for thought: both docker and podman have HTTP APIs that can be used instead of their cli programs:

• https://docs.docker.com/reference/api/engine/version/v1.52/ (OpenAPI)
• https://docs.podman.io/en/latest/_static/api.html?version=latest (OpenAPI)

It's possible to generate a typescript client for those APIs and use it directly instead of relying on external CLIs:

docker run -it --rm -v "$PWD:/local" \
  openapitools/openapi-generator-cli generate \
  -i https://docs.docker.com/reference/api/engine/version/v1.52.yaml \
  -g typescript-node \
  -o /local/docker-client

Thus avoiding the need to package docker and podman altogether. The docker client will probably work for both docker and podman, as podman API is supposed to be compatible, but this needs testing (I haven't tried it yet).

[waffles-dev]

Also it might be a good idea to wait for #515 before dealing with flatpak. I think But nice work!

TY for having a look Auri - this sets off a chain haha as we want to do a full refactor (and rework the UI) of the config page first. I was waiting for Lev/Tibix to do the first sub-page but I should probably just give it a go.

[auri-f5bde6]

Food for thought: both docker and podman have HTTP APIs that can be used instead of their cli programs:

• https://docs.docker.com/reference/api/engine/version/v1.52/ (OpenAPI)
• https://docs.podman.io/en/latest/_static/api.html?version=latest (OpenAPI)

It's possible to generate a typescript client for those APIs and use it directly instead of relying on external CLIs:

docker run -it --rm -v "$PWD:/local" \
  openapitools/openapi-generator-cli generate \
  -i https://docs.docker.com/reference/api/engine/version/v1.52.yaml \
  -g typescript-node \
  -o /local/docker-client

Thus avoiding the need to package docker and podman altogether. The docker client will probably work for both docker and podman, as podman API is supposed to be compatible, but this needs testing (I haven't tried it yet).

That seemes a lot more work than just exposing the unix socket, and I don't know if it's worth it.

p.s. I can't really speak for whether any changes should be made to the flatpak packaging as I have no idea how it work.