Ubuntu 22.04 LTS Looks To Drop Its Partner Archive In Favor Of The Snap Store

[jo-erlend]

Snapd needs to die, period. It's anti-linux in every aspect, not to mention invasive.

No it's not. What you _could_ say, as a battle hardened soldier of the revolution, and feel very strong and proud, is that it's not platform independent because it directly depends on the Linux Kernel, so it doesn't invite BSD. But there is no way for you to say that because a packaging format is based on the Linux Kernel and because it is copyleft rather than permissive, it is anti-Linux.

It's a totally silly statement. Your counter-statement is probably going to be something like all packages must have equal rights to patch my kernel, whether I add a repo to subscribe to GS extensions or GTK styles. Right? If for instance, Debian required a signature in order to tamper with low-level stuff like your kernel, then it would be a proprietary OS, is the anti-snap ideology.

But you are much more catholic than the pope.

[user1]

So many people defend Snaps here.. All I want to say is if Canonical wasn't so stubborn and instead of "doing things its own way™", it contributed to Flatpak instead, maybe, just maybe the Linux desktop would've been very close to having a standard way to distribute software and solving Linux's fragmentation problem as a result.

[dc740]

I still like how they handle that. Yeah, it may not be ideal, but... I find myself going to the snap store to get up to date packages, and avoid the ubuntu repos most of the time, so I don't think droping the partner archive is a bad decision.

Snap get a lot of hate, and I keep reading it as:
"a random, often anon, internet user complaining about things they don't understand, or that they understand but have no intention to fix with their own time"

which I honestly couldn't care less. It's been making my life easier, and that's all that matters to me right now.

[SerialCool]

Canonical has abandoned so many things so far.
Unity, Ubuntu for Phones, MIR, Shopping lenses.... just to name the most important ones.
Can you still take Snap seriously or believe it? Especially if this is again the same solo effort of Canonical, as before?
I don't think so, but I don't care, because I switched to Manjaro in the meantime. Bad for Canonical to spend useless time and money, because Canonical doesn't have the resources like Apple, Microsoft or Google. Can not go well in the long run.

[user1]

Snap get a lot of hate, and I keep reading it as:
"a random, often anon, internet user complaining about things they don't understand

And what are the things we don't understand? I think the one who doesn't understand things is you. You don't understand that the reason Snaps even exist is nothing but satisfying Canonical's bottom line. As I said, if Canonical really cared about the Linux desktop as a whole, they would've contributed to Flatpaks instead of reinventing the wheel.
Snaps work well for you? Good. But for many others they suck and many are already saying that the Flatpak version of the same app works much better

[drakonas777]

I must say, I have been witnessing this hatred for Canonical and Ubuntu for many years now and I still can't understand the reasoning behind it. Seems like a bunch of entitled FOSS fanatics are trying to vent accumulated hate on something, and that "the most ideological appropriate something victim" just happens to be Canonical and Ubuntu. When the main argument is basically "Canonical do stuff not aligned to FOSS philosophy, so Canonical/Ubuntu bad", it means no arguments. They can do whatever they want within the realm of legality. They own you nothing. They are not obliged to follow any "FOSS friendly" design/architecture/strategy whatsoever. Having the largest market share and influence (historically at least) does not even make company morally obliged to anything. Perhaps spawn less toxicity, maybe?

IMHO the main tragedy of a Linux desktop is actually being too much focused on the FOSS and no corporate interest to make full featured Linux based OS. Most of the OS users in general and a very large portion of Linux users just want the job to be done. That's it. I have been working as a embedded systems developer for 15 years now, and what I've subjectively experienced that most of my past and current co-workers which have to use Linux due job specifics (build systems/toolchains/tools etc.) chooses Ubuntu LTS or something based on Ubuntu LTS, because it generates less issues and less "overhead" in the workflow. They do not worry about how much closed or open OS is, how much of proprietary firmware's it encapsulates. They worry about how much productive ant problem-free they can be in a Linux environment. It's a whole market of users, though, not a big one and quite specialized. I believe this would apply to other areas too (developers or other fields, system admins, scientists etc.).

I personally would like that one of the megacorps (Google for example) would buy Canonical and make Ubuntu LTS more closed, more locked, more centralized managed, so that we, who actually need a stable Linux based OS which just works, would have one. Or just make a full feature Linux based OS in other means, like a Chrome OS, but without that "network OS" crap. When you think about it, Microsoft has Windows, Apple has MacOS and Google has shit. It has high quality Pixel books with powerful hardware and nonsensical OS (Chrome OS) for these specific devices. Yeah, buy aluminum unibody laptop with i7 and use f***ing javascript apps in the browser engine. F OFF. Somebody, just make a normal Linux based OS (with proprietary or semi-proprietary user-space - I don't casr) and a great user experience for normal IT people. Please.

[jo-erlend]

So many people defend Snaps here.. All I want to say is if Canonical wasn't so stubborn and instead of "doing things its own way™", it contributed to Flatpak instead, maybe, just maybe the Linux desktop would've been very close to having a standard way to distribute software and solving Linux's fragmentation problem as a result.

Snap is a complete packaging solution. It provides operating systems. Flatpak is intentionally designed to require a running desktop OS, so it cannot be used on servers and it cannot be used for drivers, kernels or whole systems.

[jo-erlend]

You are mixing up the "code of conduct" with the CLA. The latter gives Ubuntu all rights to your changes. The former is about not being an ass in the public.

Your point is that if I invest fifty million dollars in a project and you invest five minutes, then we should be equal partners, right? I disagree with that. If those are your terms, I reject your request for partnership. Take your five minutes and GTFO.

[uid313]

The partner archive repository is the first thing I disable after I install Ubuntu.

[user1]

Snap is a complete packaging solution. It provides operating systems. Flatpak is intentionally designed to require a running desktop OS, so it cannot be used on servers and it cannot be used for drivers, kernels or whole systems.

Which only confirms that Snaps are more suitable for server / enterprise workloads and less for desktop usage. but Canonical still shoves their half finished product down users throats out of convenience.