Flatpak Officially Announced For "Next Generation Linux Applications"

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Flatpak Officially Announced For "Next Generation Linux Applications"

Coinciding with today's release of Fedora 24 is the official debut of Flatpak, formerly known as XDG-App...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Flatpak-Debuts-Today

[plonoma]

Does installation time come with installation time ranges?
(For when uninstalling you could use time ranges of file creation and folder creation when something went wrong with the package manager on your system.)

[k1l_]

Now we know why the Red-Hat guys were so pissed when canonical announced snappy and tried to make it look bad. (while declaring they stating pure objective facts and not beeing biased m( )

[You-]

I thought the "Red Hat guys" were pretty balanced. The main blog was clear in that both solutions were still a work in progress (and if you read the blogs, you would realise that flatpack was mentioned in them.)

What they didnt like was the insinuation that they were supporting and collaborating with Canonical over snappy as the solution.

[Scellow]

Battle is already lost for linux since two major actors are going in different path..

Mir <=> Wayland
and now
Flatpack <=> Snappy

[justmy2cents]

Now we know why the Red-Hat guys were so pissed when canonical announced snappy and tried to make it look bad. (while declaring they stating pure objective facts and not beeing biased m( )

flatpak is almost 2 years old, a lot more if you count how long since discussions started. i'm guessing your address is: under the rock 1, nowhere near information.

objective fact with flatpak and snap is simple.

- snap was developed in house for long time where it was completely tied to ubuntu until few days ago, it is tied to ubuntu store, requires CLA and does not provide server component to host packages. ok, you can host them on web, but you won't be able to push updates.
- flatpak is developed in view for whole time, requires no CLA, cross distro support was from the start in goals, you can host your repository

main beef not just Redhat but most distros had was the fact that once canonical approached the distros they started commercializing that as done deal and finished product

now guess which one is better

[ernstp]

...

They're both silly for not managing to cooperate.

[ssokolow]

They're both silly for not managing to cooperate.

Everyone except Canonical managed to cooperate. I'd say this situation is admirable when you've got a single company trying to dictate terms.

Hell, they already threw in the towel with Upstart when Debian decided against it. Let's hope that, once we start to see some Wayland and Flatpak adoption, they'll cave on one of those relatively quickly too.

[Mystro256]

Well, two major issues I see with snap: less secure and bigger file sizes. As for Flatpack, I'm pretty sure the only downside is that it requires systemd (for now).

A question I have though: can you make a flatpack that will work on X11, considering you can specify --socket=x11? I'm aware that Wayland is more secure, but until Wayland becomes more ubiquitous, having flatpacks with X11 and wayland support could be useful for distribution (developer makes it once, works on all distros, like a windows MSI or Mac's pkg). Especially with any nonfree software or software that would benefit from having regular updates straight from the developer.

[Mez']

flatpak is almost 2 years old, a lot more if you count how long since discussions started. i'm guessing your address is: under the rock 1, nowhere near information.

objective fact with flatpak and snap is simple.

- snap was developed in house for long time where it was completely tied to ubuntu until few days ago, it is tied to ubuntu store, requires CLA and does not provide server component to host packages. ok, you can host them on web, but you won't be able to push updates.
- flatpak is developed in view for whole time, requires no CLA, cross distro support was from the start in goals, you can host your repository

main beef not just Redhat but most distros had was the fact that once canonical approached the distros they started commercializing that as done deal and finished product

now guess which one is better

Beside your troll or oriented/biased overview (Canonical is evil, blah blah blah), I would say none.
I'm still gonna go with ppas/AUR/.deb/.rpm or alike.

Apart from lazy half-involved parties such as Valve, I don't see the point in these snaps/xdg-apps. Amongst other reasons, linux is interesting in the first place because of the way it handles dependencies and packages.
If it just starts to basically copy the Windows model, then one of the strongest added value of using it is just gone. Meaning we are going towards losing the architecture battle, when we should keep the idea it is better designed without multiple libraries, and fight for this sound architecture principle.
I'm not refusing change for the sake of it (such as Cinnamon/Mate users after Gnome3/Unity), but I don't see the added value here. At all.