tsugu@slrpnk.net to linuxmemes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 8 days agoI like both, but usually prefer Ubuntuslrpnk.netimagemessage-square167fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10
arrow-up11arrow-down1imageI like both, but usually prefer Ubuntuslrpnk.nettsugu@slrpnk.net to linuxmemes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 8 days agomessage-square167fedilink
minus-squarex00za@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·5 days agoYeah but only in 2016 were they made available for other Linux distros. Flatpaks were available since 2015.
minus-squarelengau@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up0·5 days agoSo why would Canonical switch to another technology that came after what they made and doesn’t cover their biggest use cases for snaps?
minus-squarelengau@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up0·5 days agoBut if flatpak doesn’t meet the widest use case of snap, are they really describing flatpak?
minus-squarex00za@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·5 days agoI replied to: With snap they can release the package a single time, and it can be used across all of their releases. I think this is the main point of snap. Being able to use it across other systemd distros is just a bonus.
Snaps predate flatpaks though.
Yeah but only in 2016 were they made available for other Linux distros. Flatpaks were available since 2015.
So why would Canonical switch to another technology that came after what they made and doesn’t cover their biggest use cases for snaps?
I’m not saying they would.
But if flatpak doesn’t meet the widest use case of snap, are they really describing flatpak?
I replied to: