Replies: 16 comments 5 replies
-
I would be interested in seeing this as well. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'm not sure how I feel about this. That means more testing, more maintenance work, and probably just a little bit more new users 🤔 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Well if you plan to go only deb and rpm packages then you'd need/should setup repos for each distro, which is additional maintenance on it's own. If you go flatpak/snap you no longer have to worry about maintaining repos for each distro. Just my opinion. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Personally I prefer deb packages, in companies with secure workstations, it is easier to offer a deb to administrators who will deploy them on workstations than a flatpack or snap that are not accepted because it would allow users to install their own applications without being administrators. If you are going in the direction of packaged applications, also keep the deb and rpm for those who have no choice. I chose Ulauncher also on this aspect. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hello from 2020! Flatpak is still a good thing, so add a flatpak distribution will be a huge plus |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Anyone can create a flatpak version of ulauncher. It does not have to be the developers themselves. If you want flatpak, try researching how to build it and then contribute. @gornostal is right, this adds maintenance overhead, so any help is certainly appreciated. /cc @rakshazi @rowbawts @rejurime ps: I do not use ulauncher anymore, just a bystander :) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@gornostal Would you plese make this available in Flatpak? I am dying to run it on Centos 7. Please please please... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@bwv656 I've marked this issue as contributor-friendly. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I understand Flatpak's to have privacy and security benefits over anything depending on PPA's. If I'm right, wouldn't this be motivation enough to support Flatpak's? If not, please kindly educate this Noob ;) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Some user reported (tagged @Ulauncher in twitter) that Ubuntu marks my PPA as not secure. So I would agree with you on that. Then to your point about Flatpak's security, I got curious about it and quickly stumbled upon this website: https://flatkill.org/ |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi, this Reddit post has a response to https://flatkill.org. Flatpak does not have cli support (not till now) but snap does. So will packaging them in these two formats require much change in the source code? By the way if anyone's interested, here's the official docs to build flatpak and snap packages. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
The package file would be hundreds of megabytes instead of 7mb btw. We have some big dependencies (GTK and WebkitGTK). Would we need to add conditions to our code for this, to access the host file system (like scanning for desktop entries, using system icons, picking icons for shortcuts) and launch app with the host file system scope, access to system themes, and not be killed if ulauncher crashes or is terminated (#778)? How about extensions that access the file system? For example my clipboard extension uses the system themes And would we be able to have a config/data directory that persists if people uninstall and reinstall? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'll second that! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
No, it will not.
This is part of GNOME runtime https://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/available-runtimes.html#gnome |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
That's nice. It has a lot of the heavy libraries we use actually. WebKitGTK, PyGObject, Libnotify and GObject Introspection 👍 Open Build Service added support for flatpak this year, so if we migrate to that (which we have several others reasons to want to do) supporting Flatpak might not require a lot of additional work for us. Or it might. We have a different focus for now before we can make time to look at packaging. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'd say that Flatpak has become the premier distribution method for Linux desktops now. GNOME and KDE agree. They're both integrating Flathub's app donation/payment features too. And Flatpaks are the main way to install applications on immutable distros. I realize that nobody on the team uses any of this yet, but maybe someday it'll be worth it to create an official Flathub release. You'd definitely start earning donations from it. I'm one of the people who is just waiting for Flathub donations to become available so that I can start throwing money at all my favorite app developers. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
It would be great to have Ulauncher available through Flatpak. This would make it easier to distribute Ulauncher.
If someone could try doing this manually and then listed the steps here with any caveats found along the way, I (@gornostal) will automate the releases for Flatpak
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions