© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
1b1ed1a
(Get the code!)
Hi, I am the poster of this comment.
I have some responses to comments to defend my position.
A) I didn't say Snap was useless, I think it is doing amazing things in IoT. But snapping everything may not work.
B) As said by Seth Arnold, AppArmor is NOT default in Debian.
C) Ubuntu doesn't go against anything? They are going against Flatpak with Snap. They went against everyone with Unity. They went against everyone with Mir. They went against everyone with Convergence. And over and over, Failure, Failure, Failure. I am worried that
"Blame RH for forcing immature technology on general Linux community. Wayland, Systemd, Pulseaudio, Telepathy...we have seen it all. Wayland, after nearly 10 years development, still buggy and slow, can't play well with video drivers...hell it can't even take screenshot on desktop, where Mir after very short time can do all. Mir had far less devs than Wayland."
Mir could not even copy and paste until recently. Don't say Mir was free of issues.
Red Hat forcing immature technology? Wayland is still buggy, but it is getting better, default on Fedora. Can't play well with video drivers? Still did better than Mir. Mir had far less devs than Wayland, true. So instead of fighting the larger, join them and use your devs to improve it. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Would have made Wayland come quicker, and would have possibly saved some money.
D) Nobody? Look at the posts. Look in the communities for various distributions. I have seen this being perhaps the top complaint with Snap!
E) Wrong! The org.gnome.Platform runtime is approximately 200MB, and gedit (similar in size to gcalc) is 1.6MB in Flatpak. That is less than 1/4 the size you thought Flatpak would be.
F) The opposite would be true, but isn't yet because Flatpak has more security settings. Which is a better problem to have.
"It would be great to see some more detailed responses to this from Canonical and the Snappy team.
I think many people like myself are looking at the Snap/Flatpak situation and seeing Mir/Wayland all over again, at least when it comes to the desktop. It feels like it could play out in almost exactly the same way.
If Canonical can articulate why they think Snaps should be used over Flatpak, particularly moving forward as each system picks up features and begins to resemble the other anyway, then it might help put minds at ease."
I totally agree. Canonical, GIVE us a real, solid reason why Snap is better than Flatpak! I see Snap becoming the next Mir/Unity, and part of the reason I filed this bug was because I didn't want Canonical wasting a ton of money to damage their reputation if it happens again.
"We are developing snapd because people we interact with actually like snaps. I applaud flatpak and appimage developers but I don't think we should ask an ill-defined "community" and then choose to close the shop because they voted one or another way. As for the claimed data: who did you ask?, how many people are in this community? how many people understand how flatpak, appimage and snapd work? how many developers vs users did you ask?"
I saw Solus, who chose Flatpak voicing the similar concerns as mine.
The community is ill-defined, but Flatpak makes sense. If you look at Flatpak and Snap closely, Snap comes off as an incompatible clone of Flatpak, with less security, incompatible packages, a superior build system, an app store, but no external repos (at least, not easily).
Besides this, also read my post on:
https:/