[arch-general] snapcraft.io IMO gets across the message that snaps are appropriate for Arch Linux

[Ralf Mardorf]

Hi,

after taking a brief look into building a yaml and following Ubuntu's
Snapcraft mailing list, I don't have a good opinion of it. It at
least is nothing I would recommend for usage with Arch Linux on i686
and x86_64 servers and desktop computers, not only because it requires
an Ubuntu kernel patch [1], but because it IMO is completely against
the rolling release approach and beyond that IMO broken in many ways.

The first sentence on http://snapcraft.io/ is

"Package any app for every Linux desktop, server, cloud or device, and
deliver updates directly"

and the first logo beside the Ubuntu logo is Arch Linux.

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.

Regards,
Ralf

[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Snapd#Installation

Disclaimer

I only want to inform about it, in case Arch Linux developers aren't
aware of it. I will not argue against, if Arch developers don't care
and/or disagree with my opinion. IOW I will not discuss it, the
intention is only to inform of it. ;)

[Dan Haworth]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
It at
least is nothing I would recommend for usage with Arch Linux on i686
and x86_64 servers and desktop computers, not only because it requires
an Ubuntu kernel patch [1], but because it IMO is completely against
the rolling release approach and beyond that IMO broken in many ways.

Hear hear! I absolutely agree and I'm glad someone said it. Just my two
cents..

--dan

[Jelle van der Waa]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
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/

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Jelle van der Waa

Post by Ralf Mardorf
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.

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

[Tinu Weber]

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Jelle van der Waa

Post by Ralf Mardorf
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.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
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

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Tinu Weber
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.

An excerpt from
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2016-October/287739.html

***@ubuntu.com is deeply involved in working on snappy.
^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^

Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 14:40:32 +0200
Subject: Re: Question about Snaps
To: ubuntu-***@lists.ubuntu.com
From: ***@ubuntu.com

[snip]

snaps are the future in the ubuntu ecosystem (and most likely also in
many others, when looking at the consortium of different distros and
projects that decide on their direction now in the technical oversight
board [1]) [snip]


[1] appstream, Arch, debian, elementary, KDE, Ubuntu, VLC, Fedora
^^^^
^^^^

[Bennett Piater]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 14:40:32 +0200
Subject: Re: Question about Snaps
[snip]
snaps are the future in the ubuntu ecosystem (and most likely also in
many others, when looking at the consortium of different distros and
projects that decide on their direction now in the technical oversight
board [1]) [snip]
[1] appstream, Arch, debian, elementary, KDE, Ubuntu, VLC, Fedora
^^^^
^^^^

Trying to take over the world, eh? ;)

[Tinu Weber]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
An excerpt from
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2016-October/287739.html
^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 14:40:32 +0200
Subject: Re: Question about Snaps
[snip]
snaps are the future in the ubuntu ecosystem (and most likely also in
many others, when looking at the consortium of different distros and
projects that decide on their direction now in the technical oversight
board [1]) [snip]
[1] appstream, Arch, debian, elementary, KDE, Ubuntu, VLC, Fedora
^^^^
^^^^

So there is somebody out there claiming that Arch Linux, Debian, Fedora
and whoever else will replace their own packaging ecosystem by something
like that, and the sensation media is picking it up and spreading it all
over the intertubes.

So what?

All we can do is:

* Remove snapd from the repos and piss off everyone. As stated above,
there are no technically valid reasons to do so; AL supports it, and
it's fine.

* Make a "public statement" (who? where?) that AL does not intend to
move to snaps in the future. If one thing is dead-sure, it's that
Debian will not replace their sophisticated software packaging
infrastructure by something like this, but I couldn't find anything
resembling a statement by the Debian folks on the web, so I don't
think the situation is that severe. Again, this would just be pissing
off people, nothing more.

* Let them have their little moment of euphoria and see where it goes.
Most likely nowhere. The majority of upstream devs will keep on
writing software the way they've done so far and let the distribution
maintainers do the rest (because that's easier for everyone).

As you may have noticed, I vote for option 3 :-)

Best,
Tinu

[Eli Schwartz via arch-general]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
An excerpt from
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2016-October/287739.html
^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 14:40:32 +0200
Subject: Re: Question about Snaps
[snip]
snaps are the future in the ubuntu ecosystem (and most likely also in
many others, when looking at the consortium of different distros and
projects that decide on their direction now in the technical oversight
board [1]) [snip]
[1] appstream, Arch, debian, elementary, KDE, Ubuntu, VLC, Fedora
^^^^
^^^^

What is your point? That Ubuntu lies for propaganda reasons? They have
no authority to speak for any project other than Ubuntu itself, so
statements like that are fundamentally ridiculous, and no one with a
brain believes them on faith anyway.

The fact that Ubuntu is, um, overexcited about the fact that other
distros try to make sure the software runs as intended on their distro,
is a well-known fact, and everyone here has long since been disabused of
the notion that packaging snapd means it is recommended over pacman as a
software installation method.

It seems to me though, that you have an irrational hatred of Snaps. It
is one thing to not want to use them yourself, especially from an Arch
perspective. It is another thing entirely to pick a fight on *their*
mailing list, about whether *their* users (who have different priorities
from Arch users) are willing to use Snaps. They most likely wouldn't be
Ubuntu users if they cared about the downsides of Snaps, but if they did
care, then I am sure they also know how to avoid Snaps altogether.

And what do you want from us anyway? They are legally and ethically
allowed to use the Arch Linux logo to indicate their software works on
Arch Linux, and the personal soapbox of Snapcraft/Ubuntu devs is not
under the control of the Arch devs, so we can't force them to stop
exaggerating either.

[Ralf Mardorf]

It is another thing entirely to pick a fight on *their* mailing list,
about whether *their* users (who have different priorities from Arch
users) are willing to use Snaps.

I didn't use their mailing list, to spread hate about snaps. It's
also my mailing list, since I'm a subscriber of this and several Ubuntu
falvour mailing lists to help Linux novices and btw. my help usually is
much appreciated on those mailing lists.

And what do you want from us anyway?

I only want to inform those who might not have noticed it. Since I'm not
an Arch Linux developer, I can't ask Ubuntu to remove the logo. I even
don't ask the Arch developers, to ask Ubuntu to remove it, again, I
only want to inform. It's entirely on the "owners" of Arch Linux to
decide, if they care about it or not. I don't fight for it.

Regards,
Ralf

[Eli Schwartz via arch-general]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
I didn't use their mailing list, to spread hate about snaps. It's
also my mailing list, since I'm a subscriber of this and several Ubuntu
falvour mailing lists to help Linux novices and btw. my help usually is
much appreciated on those mailing lists.

You are using Ubuntu resources to spread an anti-snapcraft message along
the lines of Arch-style philosophy.

I would appreciate if you could respect the Ubuntu motto and their
general mission statement of targeting "human beings" rather than "Linux
gurus", and extend that respect all the way to their desire to use Snaps
as a means to simplify life for their target users.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
A Mac user isn't a Linux user. We should expect another level of
self-responsibility Linux users, even from those using Ubuntu, let
alone the users of more expert orientated distros.

Um, no. Ubuntu is allowed to expect whatever level of
self-responsibility they want, from their target users. Users who
evaluate their self-responsibility as incompatible with the goals of
Ubuntu are free, in turn, to choose another distro. I suggest debian, as
it is more or less the same thing as Ubuntu just with more
responsibility. ;)

And you proceeded to argue the merits of switching to a rolling release
distro! What is your point there, exactly? People use Ubuntu *because*
it is not rolling release...

Post by Ralf Mardorf
I only want to inform those who might not have noticed it. Since I'm not
an Arch Linux developer, I can't ask Ubuntu to remove the logo. I even
don't ask the Arch developers, to ask Ubuntu to remove it, again, I
only want to inform. It's entirely on the "owners" of Arch Linux to
decide, if they care about it or not. I don't fight for it.

The Arch devs already know, and expressed their complete unconcern in
every aspect of that website and the community surrounding it.
We discovered that the last time someone spawned a mega-thread in this
mailing list. I'm sure you saw it...

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
You are using Ubuntu resources to spread an anti-snapcraft message
along the lines of Arch-style philosophy.

That is off-top for this list and apart from this untrue.

I'm a part of the Ubuntu community. For your very information, Ubuntu
for servers and desktop computers is based upon apt, not snaps. Some
issues can't be solved by using snaps, this is the wrong approach for
Ubuntu, too. However, this is OT for this list. Please don't claim that
I misused their list, this is untrue. I corrected wrong statements in
this and several other threads. Wrong statements that usually are
completely unrelated to Arch Linux.

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
The Arch devs already know, and expressed their complete unconcern in
every aspect of that website and the community surrounding it.
We discovered that the last time someone spawned a mega-thread in this
mailing list. I'm sure you saw it...

IIRC there wasn't a thread about snappy, but about a similar approach.
However, I didn't notice concerns about misleading usage of the Arch
logo on the Ubuntu website, but I might not have read the complete
thread.

Regards,
Ralf

[Eli Schwartz via arch-general]

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
You are using Ubuntu resources to spread an anti-snapcraft message
along the lines of Arch-style philosophy.

That is off-top for this list and apart from this untrue.
I'm a part of the Ubuntu community.

I'm very happy for you, but what is your point? Your membership in their
community does not get to define the overall mission statement of their
community. If you think otherwise, that is sheer arrogance.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
For your very information, Ubuntu for servers and desktop computers is
based upon apt, not snaps.

And that is apparently changing, according to Ubuntu devs. The argument
that "this is how it works right now", is not a convincing argument.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
Some issues can't be solved by using snaps, this is the wrong approach
for Ubuntu, too.

The only thing that matters for them is, what unsolvable issues are
there, *that Ubuntu cares about* ?
Your main issue seems to be that Linux users should care more than Mac
users about their OS internals.

Given that the target Ubuntu userbase is people who would otherwise be
using Macbooks, I really don't see where you are coming from at all.
Much like I don't see where they are coming from, thinking that other
distros want, like Ubuntu, to appeal to Mac users via snapcraft.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
However, this is OT for this list. Please don't claim that
I misused their list, this is untrue. I corrected wrong statements in
this and several other threads. Wrong statements that usually are
completely unrelated to Arch Linux.

It is very on topic for this list. Or at least, this thread. I am
exploring the reasons why you spammed this list by starting this thread.

Also, I am correcting the wrong statements you made about the supposed
"wrong statements" you were correcting. Only about half of them were wrong.

You misused their list. You are currently misusing this list.

Even where I agree with you, I disagree with the way you go about saying
it. So please, just stop.

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general

Post by Ralf Mardorf
For your very information, Ubuntu for servers and desktop computers
is based upon apt, not snaps.

And that is apparently changing, according to Ubuntu devs.

If you don't know Ubuntu, why do you want to talk about it on an Arch
mailing list? Are you trolling?

Apt is under development at the moment. It will replace apt-get, resp.
it already replaced it as the recommended Ubuntu package management
tool, for new releases, but not all still supported releases yet. Apt
isn't an old tool, it's new. You don't know what you are talking about.

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
You are currently misusing this list.

I just pointed out, that some people got a wrong impression about Arch
Linux as part of a consortium, that should be in favour of snappy.

I wasn't aware that Arch developers are already aware about it and if
they don't care about it, I won't care about it anymore, too.

Everything is fine.

Regards,
Ralf

[Eli Schwartz via arch-general]

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general

Post by Ralf Mardorf
For your very information, Ubuntu for servers and desktop computers
is based upon apt, not snaps.

And that is apparently changing, according to Ubuntu devs.

If you don't know Ubuntu, why do you want to talk about it on an Arch
mailing list? Are you trolling?
Apt is under development at the moment. It will replace apt-get, resp.
it already replaced it as the recommended Ubuntu package management
tool, for new releases, but not all still supported releases yet. Apt
isn't an old tool, it's new. You don't know what you are talking about.

I cannot help but feel you are drastically misunderstanding what I said.
I *thought* I said that according to Ubuntu devs, Snaps are apparently
the way of the future and will in the not-so-distant future be the
method for installing everything but the base system, or at least most
everything else.

What does that have to do with when or how apt (or any of the other
bazillion *.deb frontends) is developed, or how long (or short) it
remains the method for people installing Firefox, Libreoffice, and other
significant end-user software (leaving aside the question of
linux/systemd/bash/coreutils/blahblahblah)?

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
You are currently misusing this list.

I just pointed out, that some people got a wrong impression about Arch
Linux as part of a consortium, that should be in favour of snappy.

FWIW, I don't really care what impression non-Arch users get, and I
suspect I may not be alone in that...

Post by Ralf Mardorf
I wasn't aware that Arch developers are already aware about it and if
they don't care about it, I won't care about it anymore, too.
Everything is fine.

... but thanks.

[Ralf Mardorf]

I said that according to Ubuntu devs, Snaps are apparently the way of
the future

Do you have any evidence for this claim, apart of the claim of somebody
in favour of snappy, who isn't informed about the current development
of apt and who also claims that Debian and Arch Linux will migrate to
snappy, too?

[Eli Schwartz via arch-general]

Post by Ralf Mardorf

I said that according to Ubuntu devs, Snaps are apparently the way of
the future

Do you have any evidence for this claim, apart of the claim of somebody
in favour of snappy, who isn't informed about the current development
of apt and who also claims that Debian and Arch Linux will migrate to
snappy, too?

I can see where this is going. Once, I can respond to you to reassure
you that I am not a troll (for mentioning the word "Ubuntu", or
something -- never mind it is your Ubuntu-centric thread)... twice is
getting a bit ridiculous already.

If you cannot figure out how your own references indicate that the
person you specifically called out as an official Ubuntu person (email
address and all), who is "deeply involved in working on snappy", and
probably knows a whole lot about his own distro even if he is clueless
about Arch, is worth at least mentioning as a potential proof to
anything... then you are further gone than I thought.

I am also dreadfully confused as to who you are accusing of being
clueless about apt. I thought that was supposed to be me, but now it
seems you are accusing Mr. Grawert. Which in the context of this
discussion is an accusation directly out of left field.
Which is so this thread, really. Implications, accusations,
proclamations, etc. out of left field, with no one really sure of why we
are supposed to care or what the point is supposed to be.

This whole thread was a waste of time, and getting worse. Please don't
respond to this email, as I can already predict any reply of yours would
be a waste of time to read, and therefore I shan't bother.

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
If you cannot figure out how your own references indicate that the
person you specifically called out as an official Ubuntu person (email
address and all), who is "deeply involved in working on snappy", and
probably knows a whole lot about his own distro even if he is clueless
about Arch, is worth at least mentioning as a potential proof to
anything... then you are further gone than I thought.

I proved you wrong and you are not willing to accept that you are
wrong, that's funny.

Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
Mr. Grawert

"wow, working on snappy all the time obviously made me miss that new apt
feature :)

you are actually correct, with the switch from apt-get to apt this is
indeed possible, sorry for the noise..." -
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2016-November/288224.html

I don't know why _you_ Eli, spread wrong claims and ask me to not reply
to your wrong claims. Consider not to spread FUD.

There even is something bad with Mr. Grawert. It's very simple, some
developers are in favour of snappy others plan to stay with normal
repositories, shared libraries, the non-container approach. I
several times explained that I corrected wrong statements of this
developer as well as yours. But this wasn't the topic. The topic
was just to point out, that the Arch Logo on the Ubuntu website could
lead to misunderstandings.

This thread actually was finished several mails ago, it's just that you
blamed me with wrong off-topic assumptions. Please stopp!

Regards,
Ralf

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
There even is something bad with Mr. Grawert. It's very simple, some

is _not_

pardon a typo, I missed the "not"

Serious Eli, it's just you who is spreading nonsense at the moment. By
reading something, unrelated to this Arch thread, out of context of an
Ubuntu thread.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
developers are in favour of snappy others plan to stay with normal
repositories, shared libraries, the non-container approach. I
several times explained that I corrected wrong statements

[Lukas Rose]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
The first sentence on http://snapcraft.io/ is
"Package any app for every Linux desktop, server, cloud or device, and
deliver updates directly"
and the first logo beside the Ubuntu logo is Arch Linux.

Thanks a lot for pointing this out. I don't want to judge if there's need for a change, but I want to mention that this might cause a false impression of arch linux to users not aware of the disadvantages of secondary software sources / "snaps". But I agree to your opinion, as long as others don't see the need for a change, I don't do either.