Vanilla OS 2.0 Shifting From Ubuntu Base To Debian Sid

[marlock]

Linux Mint devs still think it's better to use Ubuntu as their base distro and not plain Debian... (source: several scattered replies by Clement Lefebvre to user comments in several of the official blog posts)

they routinely check Debian out as their plan B by maintaining LMDE - Linux Mint Debian Edition

https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=4287

they also have a strong opinion on Snaps vs. Flatpaks and native (apt) packages:

https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906

Linux Mint offers a kernel updates management gui similar to (imho better than) UKUU but based on kernel.ubuntu.org kernels so it's usually shipping the same kernel as its base Ubuntu LTS edition and offers all HWE kernel versions as soons as made available by Canonical... plus they did start offering an "edge iso" with the HWE kernel so newer hardware can enjoy LM liveboot isos too without going through hoops

https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=4273

[elduderino]

Like Fedora, GNOME, Wayland, and systemd, Flatpak is clearly pushed by Red Hat and a lot of the development is done by Red Hat employees. Even if the projects are technically independent.

You clearly haven't looked at the commit logs in a long time.

The primary developers seem to be `smvc` and `mwleeds` by commit velocity, neither of which are associated with Red Hat. Furthermore, smvc is a prominent Debian developer.

[Estranged1906]

Um, what?
Since when Flatpak is a Red Hat product? Even if its lead developer works for Red Hat, it doesn't mean it's a Red Hat product.

Like Fedora, GNOME, Wayland, and systemd, Flatpak is clearly pushed by Red Hat and a lot of the development is done by Red Hat employees. Even if the projects are technically independent.

[user1]

why would Ubuntu have to preinstall Flatpak (a Red Hat product)?

Um, what?
Since when Flatpak is a Red Hat product? Even if its lead developer works for Red Hat, it doesn't mean it's a Red Hat product.

[Estranged1906]

How is it unfair? https://www.phoronix.com/news/Ubuntu...pak-By-Default

Flatpak is wanted more and more by users. Snapd not. Fedora never had it preinstalled nor does it seem that Fedora (or any spins) users are wanting it.

Exactly. If Fedora doesn't want to preinstall Snapd (a Canonical product), why would Ubuntu have to preinstall Flatpak (a Red Hat product)?

What "more and more users" want is hard to say as there's no reliable data, and it's also irrelevant for Canonical. Snap has the downside that there's no third-party repos, Flatpak has the downside that you can't run system apps or rootful apps (e.g. VPN client). Both are not perfect.

[CochainComplex]

That's a bit unfair. Flatpak is not being kicked out, they just want to create the same "experience" for all Official Flavours. You can still install Flatpak from the official repo, similar how you can install Snapd from the official repo on Fedora, without anyone crying that it has to be preinstalled in, say, the Fedora KDE Spin.

How is it unfair? https://www.phoronix.com/news/Ubuntu...pak-By-Default

Flatpak is wanted more and more by users. Snapd not. Fedora never had it preinstalled nor does it seem that Fedora (or any spins) users are wanting it.

[Estranged1906]

Since Ubuntu trys to kickout Flatpak more and more it is a wise decision to swap the base distro.

That's a bit unfair. Flatpak is not being kicked out, they just want to create the same "experience" for all Official Flavours. You can still install Flatpak from the official repo, similar how you can install Snapd from the official repo on Fedora, without anyone crying that it has to be preinstalled in, say, the Fedora KDE Spin.

[BrokenAnsible]

Debian is a much better experience overall IMO. Debian Sid right now is really great. If only POP_OS! would follow suite the world would be my oyster. The last vestige of Ubuntu in my life is POP_OS! which I still adore.

[Britoid]

Even if Debian itself has some disadvantages, I don't think this really matters in case of Vanilla OS, because just like Fedora Silverblue and OpenSuse MicroOS, it's an immutable distro with a minimal package base, so Flatpak is used for most regular software. In case something is not available as Flatpak, users are expected to use Distrobox. So the real question is how well are they going to handle updates because they intend to use Debian Unstable as their base and ship the updates in a more stable manner, kinda what Manjaro does (I hope they're going to be wayy better at this than Manjaro).

I believe they're planning to swap to using OCI images, in which case they can pin to builds of Debian Sid to build on top of.

[dreamcat4]

my feelings are... if it can help get these core features into upstream debian, and then (also its derivatives). then that is probably unrealistic to expect, but a wish on my part. to make a stronger alternative to ubuntu

however otoh if they didnt go with debian at all, but had instead switched to another distro. then maybe could have been even better outcome