Appimages totally suck, because many developers think they were a real packaging format and support them exclusively.

Their use case is tiny, and in 99% of cases Flatpak is just better.

I could not find a single post or article about all the problems they have, so I wrote this.

This is not about shaming open source contributors. But Appimages are obviously broken, pretty badly maintained, while organizations/companies like Balena, Nextcloud etc. don’t seem to get that.

  • GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Do you mean fedora not installing codecs by default and the flatpak version of firefox has it bundled, i.e. just works?

    I don’t want to argument with you about that. If something doesn’t work as expected or intended, you’ve done a bad job. Stuff not working on linux isn’t exclusive to flatpak. It’s the fault of maintainers if people complain about a flatpak version compared to distro package.

    More people have to use flatpak and report the bugs they experience. The more people focus on flstpak the less infancy bugs will appear.

    I’ve got only recent runtimes installed. There’s no old runtime. I understand your concern though, but it’s less of a problem for maintained software. Moreover, you’ve got the same problrm for other package manager. Flatpakcan even improve upon this because it’s bundled.

    There’s also a distinction to be made if it’s an official distribution channel or if someone else packaged it.