Gerald B. Cox píše v Čt 16. 06. 2016 v 11:45 -0300:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro@gnome.
org> wrote:
> Challenge for the marketing folks: can we get these tech journalism
> sites writing about Flatpak instead? About GNOME Software's new
> support
> for displaying and installing Flatpaks in F24? Otherwise, I see
> upstreams adopting Snappy and not Flatpak.
>
I've seen lots of articles about Snappy and didn't even know that
Flatpak existed. Granted I don't follow Gnome development and am
more interested in KDE and LxQT - but that said, I'm not particularly
interested in Ubuntu either. If the idea behind flatpak is to make
more packages available, it ain't going to work if people don't know
about it. Most people will just choose snappy or flatpak, ,and since
both work - just use the snappy format. It's like Beta and VHS or
more recently HD DVD and Blu-ray. If you have a universal format,
one will become dominant - and for better or worse, it's not
necessarily about which one is better, it has to do with marketing.
--
KDE has been interested in Flatpak for over a year. They even have a
KDE runtime and a couple of KDE apps packaged:
https://community.kde.org/Flatpak
Yes, Snappy is better known because it's marketed by Canonical itself
while Flatpak is still mostly pushed by the community, but I still
believe Flatpak is better positioned to be a multidistro standard.
Snappy has been developed with Ubuntu in mind only, just recently they
made it work on other distributions (with a lot of shortcomings
mentioned in this thread), the only reasonable way to distribute snaps
is through Canonical's servers now, they require the unpopular CLA to
contribute,...
Jiri