| sem | What do you all think about the future of Ubuntu and Snaps? Will flatpaks also be 1st class citizens on Ubuntu if developers want to ship their apps that way? | 17:41 |
|---|---|---|
| oerheks | no. | 17:41 |
| sem | What will happen instead? | 17:42 |
| oerheks | snaps run better than flatpak, imho | 17:42 |
| sem | Ubuntu staff repackages the flatpak as a snap? Or user installs flatpak anyway and muddles through? | 17:43 |
| oerheks | who knows what will happen, will publishers miss the boat by provinding flatpak only? | 17:43 |
| oerheks | Ubuntu staff repackages the flatpak as a snap? huh? | 17:43 |
| sem | Maybe they do run better -- I hope publishers support snap bc I use Ubuntu lol | 17:43 |
| sem | Staff / volunteers I suppose | 17:44 |
| sem | Like package maintainers working to make Ubuntu packages from source | 17:44 |
| sem | But if someone popular like OBS decides they can't spend the resources to support both flatpak and snap, they have to choose | 17:45 |
| sem | Maybe some publishers only make snaps, some only make flatpaks, and two distinct communities emerge | 17:47 |
| sarnold | not everything can be flatpaked and the contortions necessary to snap something might not be worth it .. but most software can probably be packaged for either without too much trouble, so if something is interesting enough, probably someone will package it up with their favorite packaging format | 20:48 |
| JanC | would be nicer if we got a standardised way to run applications in a container from .deb packages really... | 21:22 |
| sarnold | systemd-nspawn could probably be tricked into doing that | 21:24 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!