On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 13:42:26 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 13:22:49 +0100, Jelle van der Waa wrote: > >On 11/24/16 at 12:18pm, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > >> My opinion is, that it would be better, if the Arch Linux logo > >> would be removed from http://snapcraft.io/ , because I guess it > >> gets across a wrong message. > > > >You are aware that we package snapd in [community]? [1] > > > >I'm not sure why ask for the logo to be removed from the website, > >technically we support the snapd package. > > > >[1] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/snapd/ > > Yes, I've tested building a snap and also installed snapd. Developers > using Arch Linux could be interested to provide their software by > snaps and might want to have a complete environment. There's nothing > wrong with providing it, for those who have the opinion, that it is a > good approach. However, the message of Ubuntu's http://snapcraft.io/ > is ambiguous. To install software on Arch Linux installs, even AUR > helpers aren't official supported, > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_helpers , so I assume that > snaps are also not supported. Snaps (and other applications like pip, gems, cabal, docker, ...) do have capabilities to install additional data to the system. But they do not interfere with pacman's package/software infrastructure like AUR helpers and pacman wrappers do. I don't like the idea behind this "universal package manager" approach either, but from a strictly technical point of view, it is no different than any of aforementioned tools. What they install may not be supported by the community/maintainers, but the tools themselves are. My 5 pedantic cents. > Again, if others don't share my opinion it's ok, no need to discuss > it, now I only try to clarify my point of view. > > Regards, > Ralf Best, Tinu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
