• KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    I actually don’t understand the issue people have with Snaps. The main gripe seems to be “It’s controlled by Canonical”.
    But why is it an issue that Canonical controls a source of software for their own OS? Isn’t that the same with every distro’s repository?

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      72
      ·
      1 year ago

      But why is it an issue that Canonical controls a source of software for their own OS? Isn’t that the same with every distro’s repository?

      No. You can add any other repository to apt, rpm, Flatpak, etc. You cannot do the same with Snap and that’s by design. Canonical wants to be the sole gatekeeper of Linux software, hoping that all developers have no alternative but to publish software on the Snap store (ideally only there) which works best on Ubuntu.

      Therefore: Fuck Snap.

      • makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly. I feel they want to sell it to a big player, but no big player will touch it unless they can fully control it. Hence snap as part of that plan. Ubuntu is a hell no for me.

        • caseyweederman@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          Forget selling it.
          I think they’re going to get everyone trapped in the ecosystem, and then they’ll start charging for access to the source.

          • KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            How would they trap everyone in the ecosystem?
            This isn’t Apple, there’s a gajillon other ways of getting software you can use on every single linux distro.

                • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Then I guess it’s a good thing they don’t control all other Linux distros.

                  But they would to a degree if the Snap Store would actually succeed becoming the Linux app store (like Steam is for games but that’s more because all other vendors don’t care to make a Linux client).

                  • KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Open source software would still be available packaged by the distros and as Flatpak, even if the software’s author offered it exclusively as Snap.

      • KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You cannot do the same with Snap and that’s by design. Canonical wants to be the sole gatekeeper of Linux software

        Then why did they publish source code and documentation for all parts of it, so you can create your own snap store?

          • Patch@feddit.ukOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You can; the issue is that you can’t add two snap repositories at once.

            This is functionally pretty much the same thing, as nobody is likely to want to use snap while locking themselves out of the main snap repository, but it’s still important to make the distinction.

            In theory I guess there’s nothing stopping you setting up a mirror of the main snap repo with automatic package scraping, but nobody’s really bothered exploring it seeing as no distro other than Ubuntu has taken any interest in running snap.

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I know that it’s possible to change the one entry but adding additional ones is not possible and that’s by design.

                • Patch@feddit.ukOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s all open source so there’s no reason you couldn’t fork it and add that functionality. Although it’d probably be a fairly involved piece of work; it wouldn’t be a simple one-line change.

                  • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It’s not all open source. Canonical merely made available a super simple reference implementation of the Snap server but the actual Snap Store is proprietary.

        • flashgnash@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          From reading this that’s not the whole story. Someone working at canonical successfully made a version of snap that could use alternative stores, but the default version does not allow it

          And honestly at the point of installing that modified version you may as well just install a different package manager anyway