I don’t like them, but I’d like to remind my fellow Canonical-Haters to not become User-Haters instead. It’s okay to have preferences, but let’s not antagonise each other.
That said, flatpak > compiling from source > writing from scratch > writing with binary editor > not having it at all > snap
That is pretty funny. However the “not having it at all” mfs suddenly reconsider when it’s the only way to install an app. I for example maintain the 4K Video Downloader Plus snap and the only other installation method is a .deb. In the stats I can see many other distros than just Ubuntu. I think it’s the ideal packaging format for apps that should stay up to date at all time, even if the system isn’t.
However the “not having it at all” mfs suddenly reconsider when it’s the only way to install an app.
I mean, if you want the app badly enough, I guess “not having it” slips down in the ranking. I have yet to find a single app I wanted enough to put snap on my system though. So far, I’ve found Flatpaks, AppImage, RPM packages or source code for everything I need.
Look, I don’t wanna argue about the advantages or disadvantages of it. My beef isn’t with snap as a technology, but with Canonical’s practices, and rather than railing against them, I decided to skip town and find some distro where I’m not fighting my vendor.
Honestly, most of my hate is with the sn-apt switchup where using apt would install snaps instead of the debs I naively assumed I’d get. I don’t wanna argue about the format or the utility of a single centrally maintained package store. I also still think Ubuntu is a good entry point for Linux newbies.
I hate that apt installs something other than debs so much. That’s super annoying. And I agree, I don’t really care but don’t change expectations, if ubuntu thinks snap is better, then transition to snap with its own toolset, don’t bastardize the current toolset.
I don’t like them, but I’d like to remind my fellow Canonical-Haters to not become User-Haters instead. It’s okay to have preferences, but let’s not antagonise each other.
That said, flatpak > compiling from source > writing from scratch > writing with binary editor > not having it at all > snap
That is pretty funny. However the “not having it at all” mfs suddenly reconsider when it’s the only way to install an app. I for example maintain the 4K Video Downloader Plus snap and the only other installation method is a .deb. In the stats I can see many other distros than just Ubuntu. I think it’s the ideal packaging format for apps that should stay up to date at all time, even if the system isn’t.
I mean, if you want the app badly enough, I guess “not having it” slips down in the ranking. I have yet to find a single app I wanted enough to put snap on my system though. So far, I’ve found Flatpaks, AppImage, RPM packages or source code for everything I need.
Look, I don’t wanna argue about the advantages or disadvantages of it. My beef isn’t with snap as a technology, but with Canonical’s practices, and rather than railing against them, I decided to skip town and find some distro where I’m not fighting my vendor.
I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other, but I love your snap hate 🤣
Honestly, most of my hate is with the sn-apt switchup where using apt would install snaps instead of the debs I naively assumed I’d get. I don’t wanna argue about the format or the utility of a single centrally maintained package store. I also still think Ubuntu is a good entry point for Linux newbies.
I hate that apt installs something other than debs so much. That’s super annoying. And I agree, I don’t really care but don’t change expectations, if ubuntu thinks snap is better, then transition to snap with its own toolset, don’t bastardize the current toolset.