Demi Marie Obenour writes: > On 7/10/26 09:43, Alyssa Ross wrote: >> Demi Marie Obenour writes: >> >>> I noticed that vm-import, run-appimage, and run-flatpak all have the >>> same code to start a VM, and run-flatpak and run-appimage both have >>> the same code to shut down a VM. Is this intentional, or should it >>> be replaced with common code? >> >> Yes, it probably should. But it is sort of intentional — sometimes I'm >> not sure exactly which parts should be shared, so I leave code >> duplicated for a while with the idea that it'll become more clear what >> the common core should be over time. (It usually works out.) Without a >> good understanding, it's easy to deduplicate too much, and end up with >> something that isn't flexible enough down the line, and then it has to >> be un-deduplicated again. Happy for you to try deduplicating it if you >> think you have a good idea of where to draw that line, but otherwise >> it's also fine for it to stay duplicated for now. > > The code that creates temporary files and per-VM users is the same for > vm-import, run-appimage, and run-flatpak. The code that tears down > instances and namespaces is the same for run-appimage and run-flatpak. Right, but my point is that doesn't *ncessarily* mean that those individual things would make sense as their own reusable components. It might do, but it's not inferrable just from the duplication.