> `$XDG_CONFIG_HOME/$SOFTWARE_NAME` is the de facto way
That's different from "does not follow the XDG base directory specification".
A specification (hopefully) is unambiguous. Anything else has little objective value.
> That snap will behave the same across distributions
That sounds like a reasonable assumption to me.
> that snap is supported on different distributions at all
> that someone even wants to install the snap package
Most (average) users don't care about packaging formats at all (nor do they care where software stores their cache/config, for that matter).
> All of them are frankly really bad assumptions and just cause people pain.
That's just your opinion/perception.
I'm marking again this bug as a duplicate of bug #1575053. Please file a new bug for the migration of existing profiles that doesn't work for you (with details on your profiles layout), so we can track the issue separately.
> `$XDG_CONFIG_ HOME/$SOFTWARE_ NAME` is the de facto way
That's different from "does not follow the XDG base directory specification".
A specification (hopefully) is unambiguous. Anything else has little objective value.
> That snap will behave the same across distributions
That sounds like a reasonable assumption to me.
> that snap is supported on different distributions at all
That's not an assumption, it's a fact: https:/ /snapcraft. io/docs/ installing- snapd.
> that someone even wants to install the snap package
Most (average) users don't care about packaging formats at all (nor do they care where software stores their cache/config, for that matter).
> All of them are frankly really bad assumptions and just cause people pain.
That's just your opinion/perception.
I'm marking again this bug as a duplicate of bug #1575053. Please file a new bug for the migration of existing profiles that doesn't work for you (with details on your profiles layout), so we can track the issue separately.