I LIKE SNAPS

[EzeeLinux]

Yesterday, I had to install Skype on one of my Ubuntu machines. I haven’t used it in years but it was install it or miss the interview scheduled for 6 pm. So… I went off to the Skype web page to figure out how you use it on Ubuntu these days and I was surprised to see that they posted the command to install a snap package. It ssmeed like the fastest and least invasive way to get Skype up and running in  a hurry. Well, the installation was perfect and the software opened right up looking the way it should. My old account was still active so I just logged in and waited for my call. Every thing went well and I decided to leave the snap installed just in case I needed it again.

Isn’t this how installing software is supposed to be? No worrying about dependencies or wondering where all the documentation and executables are going in the file system… Just a quick download and you’re ready to go. Canonical ruffled a few feathers when they announced that they we’re going to start distributing the Chromium browser as a snap. Guess what? It works just fine and I’m OK with it ‘cause it makes good sense for web-facing software to have an expedited update path. 

What really tipped me in favor of snaps was when they released Kenlive in a snap. That’s a big deal, folks. That editor is something that you really want the very latest version of and having it come in a snap solves a lot of desktop integration issues. 

No, I don’t think snaps should replace everything but for third party software they offer a really clean way to get it going quickly. Where the line between good ol’ APT and Snap is will just have to be figured out over time but I’m really happy that snaps are catching on because it opens new doors to developers.

[Tuxinho]

i have to respectfully disagree. Except for the last paragraph.

You starting by explaining that you went into the web and downloaded a package and it just installed with every dependency. It strangely remind me something really old. Yes it is exactly how windows folks act and do things. The officials repos and the package manager available in every linux distros are making you safe from malicious software. Ok there is a downside and you, sometimes, have to lift the hood, put your hands in the engine and get them dirty. That is changing some configs files, or searching for some dependency and what not.
At least in my way to see things linux it is not an industry it is more about craft and art.

This is why i don't like the path canonical is taking. It is trying to change the arts and craft way into and scarry factory and this causes the removal of what took many of use us in the linux "community" in the first place: the freedom. Freedom of changing things, freedom of mistaking and seeking for help in forums and what not, that is what makes linux a community.


Now about the last paragraph, i have to admit it will open doors to closed sources apps companies. And this might take in more people who are not making the jump because we lacking this big companies apps in the repos. And this companies will be safe developing theirs apps and keep theirs code safe and closed source. But i am afraid linux "newbies" wont get this concept and see it as the familiar windows way of getting software anyhow from anywhere aka living dangerously.

[bescott9944]

i have to respectfully disagree. Except for the last paragraph.

This is why i don't like the path canonical is taking. It is trying to change the arts and craft way into and scarry factory and this causes the removal of what took many of use in the linux "community" in the first place: the freedom. Freedom of changing things, freedom of mistaking and seeking for help in forums and what not, that is what makes linux a community.

Now about the last paragraph, i have to admit it will open doors to closed sources apps companies. And this might take in more people who are not making the jump because we lacking this big companies apps in the repos. And this companies will be safe developing theirs apps and keep theirs code safe and closed source. But i am afraid linux "newbies" wont get this concept and see it as the familiar windows way of getting software from anyhow from anywhere aka living dangerously.

I think you said that pretty well... It sounds like the Windows way and I smell Microsoft influence in this SNAP issue big time... All closed and e can't look or even see the code...
LLAP

[bob777]

Since Canonical and Micro$oft are in Bed together and take long warm showers...I wouldn't touch either with a 10mt barge pole. 
https://techstuffer.com/microsoft-canoni...indows-10/

Why would Linux lovers use or trust Ubuntu when we see this...
https://redmondmag.com/articles/2017/07/...istro.aspx
https://ubuntu.com/blog/canonical-sponso...crosoft-hq

I know Joe loves Ubuntu from his videos and has been a little critical of Linux Mint of late and Mint is based on Ubuntu but it isn't Ubuntu and is not in bed with Micro$oft. 

[leon.p]

My opinion on this will be slightly biased, as the problems solved by snaps are problems I do not have. I have no need for any proprietary software and I also do not need to get the latest binaries of some application.

I also will not deny that the technology behind snaps is probably pretty impressive and noteworthy, and unlike many I definitely do not criticize Canonical for creating their own software.


However, snaps (and any other form of universal package management) go directly against the purpose of having distributions in the first place. The people who work on distributions do far, far more than most users probably realize, however in this context I will focus on the repository maintainers. As you probably know, every serious distribution has a motto, a statement or some kind of idea, some goal that needs to be achieved; Usually this is providing a good experience for a targeted group of users. The people who are maintaining the software repositories do not just package software, they also make sure that the software they ship works well together and that it helps achieve the goal of the distribution. Repository maintainers write missing documentation, patch and modify the software at source level, change the defaults, write service files, test and much more to achieve the best possible eperience. With snaps however, there is a single repository for all distributions, which means there is no goal, nothing to achieve other than "provide software for all Linux users" and the package quality will suffer from this, especially if we consider than anyone can upload anything to the snap store.

For the very same reason I also dislike that some programming languages provide their own package manager, like Python, NodeJS, Go or Rust.

It is true that traditional package management has its issues, however there are better solutions than universal package management. My preferred one is GNU-Guix, which lets one install packages per user (meaning a user can install GIMP without root privileges, just for themselves), or even multiple different versions of the same software at once.

To end this I will link to an article by someone who actually writes software for a living. This developer, Drew DeVault, works on many interesting projects (like "sway", currently the best Wayland implementation) and wrote an article fittingly titled "Developers shouldn't distribute their own software".
https://drewdevault.com/2019/12/09/Devel...ibute.html

[Tuxinho]

this article is really interesting. I think i gonna bookmark it and reuse it when if need it later.

Also it reinforce my conviction that the distro/repos system is far superior to the windows ways of downloading anything from anyone from anywhere which is basically what snaps are.

[bescott9944]

this article is really interesting. I think i gonna bookmark it and reuse it when if need it later.

Also it reinforce my conviction that the distro/repos system is far superior to the windows ways of downloading anything from anyone from anywhere which is basically what snaps are.

Amen to that! If I wanted to do things the Windows way I would have stayed on Windows..... :-(
LLAP

---

Since Canonical and Micro$oft are in Bed together and take long warm showers...I wouldn't touch either with a 10mt barge pole. 
https://techstuffer.com/microsoft-canoni...indows-10/

Why would Linux lovers use or trust Ubuntu when we see this...
https://redmondmag.com/articles/2017/07/...istro.aspx
https://ubuntu.com/blog/canonical-sponso...crosoft-hq

I know Joe loves Ubuntu from his videos and has been a little critical of Linux Mint of late and Mint is based on Ubuntu but it isn't Ubuntu and is not in bed with Micro$oft. 

I have noticed that also and I am not sure what to make of it...