<html><head></head><body>If you want to continue to use your distro's native package, you should do that. Likewise if someone wants to volunteer to maintain the AppImage, they should do that.<br><br>That doesn't stop the project from using flatpak; they're not mutually exclusive.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On May 25, 2020 2:40:57 AM PDT, Stuart T Rogers <stuart@stella-maris.org.uk> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">Yes I agree for some limited situations it may have a use. I for one <br>have used appimage to try out a new version but my distro (a rolling <br>release) is never far behind with providing stable releases of Digikam.<br><br>While the library thing may well need security fixes if I have the <br>library on my system normally it will get security fixes probably almost <br>as soon as they become available, how will I know these libraries will <br>need updating in the flatpak and whether or not the package has been <br>updated?<br><br>Stuart<br><br>On 25/05/2020 10:34, Remco Viëtor wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">On lundi 25 mai 2020 10:38:31 CEST Stuart T Rogers wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"> Having read a bit about flatpak now I do have some concerns.<br><br> Firstly it seems that the actual deliverable will be considerably larger<br> than the normal install of Digikam say on openSUSE because it will need<br> to bundle in all the required other software it needs whether or not the<br> base OS already has the correct levels and versions installed.<br></blockquote><br>That would be the same for appimage or any other similar packaging. And it's<br>what is needed to make the package independent of the distribution and its<br>versioning.<br><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"> Secondly while it runs in a sandbox it will likely increase the memory<br> requirement needed over what would normally be used because all the<br> additional code needed for execution will be loaded even if it already<br> exists and is loaded in the OS.<br><br> Thirdly this seems to me to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut since I<br> have not heard of any security breaches being caused by running Digikam,<br> yes some other applications maybe should be sandboxed because of what<br> they do but I do not see the need for this with Digikam.<br></blockquote><br>But I have seen security updates for *libraries* dealing with the image<br>formats used by Digikam, like png. So while the digikam code itself might not<br>need sandboxing, this doesn't hold for the needed libraries.<br><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">Lastly it needs additional software installed on my system which<br>currently I do not use. Appimage does not need anything in addition to<br>be able to test a new version of Digikam.<br></blockquote><br>That is the price for (semi-)automatic upgrades for the flatpaks. Appimage<br>does not provide a way to upgrade to newer versions.<br> <br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">This seems to me to be a solution looking for a purpose.<br></blockquote><br>Maybe. But I've had cases where the distribution-provided version was either<br>much older than the (then) current version or crippled as my distribution<br>didn't include a library or included a too old version.<br><br>So flatpak and appimage do have a use. That doesn't mean that having<br>distribution-maintained repositories is now superfluous, but for programs that<br>have a relatively small user-base, flatpak and similar have advantages.<br><br>Remco<br><br><br><br><br><br></blockquote></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>