#Flatpak is not the future:
I don't agree with every aspect of this blog post. But the main points are correct. Container packages, such as #Snap, #Flatpak and #AppImage are the wrong way. They are a waste of resources (technical, ecological and economical) and dramatically increase complexity. Don't use them.
@Haydar I totally agree that those formats are a not ideal. Yet it may come down to the age old consideration of saving on computing resources vs. human resources. The OS landscape is now very complex and in order to support all platforms a lot of time goes into adaption, package creation, etc. This eats into human time which is usually way more expensive then computer resources. So there is a place for those formats and I don't think we'll see them go away.
Yes, this is basically about convenience. We let machines do the work of humans, because machine work is usually cheaper.
But I think this is short sighted, because the ecological costs of machine work are not included most of the time.
To save the work costs of, lets say 2 paid people within a developer team, millions of computers have to use dramatically more energy and other resources to run an application. This is crazy.
Containerized formats have their pros and cons.
I agree to the waste of ressources but I do also agree on the ease of setup a software, i.e. I did install yesterday in about 4 min a nextcloud server as snap on Debian.
Afterwards I`ve done it manually (with exisiting mariadb amd nginx). This took me more than one hour and is still not ready.
In other words: containers allow to setup something as a blackbox and sacrifices the total control..
I agree, that it might be easier to use a container image that is readily configured than installing all manually. But still, this may save time, but increase other costs (resources, ecological costs ...)
Copy & pasting random instructions may be also not ideal, if your are inexperienced. But what about approved automated recipes? Tools such as Ansible and Saltstack should make it as almost as easy as to deploy an container image.
@Haydar @caliandroid Documentation sure helps. Nextcloud in particular is a good example for doing things right there. Also by getting things to work though ones own efforts there's a lot to be learned. That's why I dislike #docker #flatpack and all those click and go #cloud offerings. But I also understand that not everyone can spare the time or has the needed foundational know how to even get started. Not a black and white issue.
@Haydar Agreed. Yet human nature is a pretty reliable indicator of the future. What can you offer a developer to benefit THEM. On a personal or company level "we" don't care about the larger impact. Heck most people won't even see the proble. So what can we offer as a better alternative that benefits the developer even more then a "lazy" flatpack?
Traditionally, packaging and distributing software isn't a developer's job. This is the job of distro maintainers. They know how the distro works and how to build software.
I can understand, that developers want to distribute their software without having the distro maintainers in their way. But providing it inside a container image does make them some kind of distro maintainers as well. In the long run (if they take this seriously) , this is more work, not less.
The developer is not the person the entire process is focused on (or should be focused on). It is the user and the user's resources, the user's security, etc.
And frankly: Developers who sacrifice user's security and waste user's resources to gain convenience for themselves, are having the wrong job.
> Permission allows $HOME
Yep, that's a hole and you're told about it. The rest are still in the sandbox.
> Flatpak contain security vulnerable software
So, like all forms of software distribution.
This is FUD, anyone who understands this technology wouldn't come to such pointless conclusions.
@Haydar @lionirdeadman @4l3x the upsides of Flatpak easily overweigh the downsides. Modern hardware were made to do complex tasks, so by not taking advantage of the headroom that modern hardware have literally means that you avoiding practical use cases. Android devices are far less powerful than desktop computers and laptops, yet what Android does with the sandboxing is a lot more than what Flatpak does; the "waste" of resources is so little that it doesn't matter.
@TheEvilSkeleton @lionirdeadman @4l3x
The thinking "modern hardware is so powerful, we don't need to think about resources" is part of the problem. That's why we have computers which are 10 times more powerful than 10 years ago, but the things we are doing are the same (all right, we watch 4K instead of HD videos).
I don't speak against sandboxing in general, but the way flatpak and snap are doing it is wasteful and wrong.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!