[digiKam-users] appimage

[Gilles Caulier]

As a developer, and as the main maintainer of the Linux AppImage bundle, i
can say :

1/ yes, maintain a stand alone bundle take a while, especially to run on
all main linux box.
2/ AppImage as HUGE advantage, as, it include all the DK dependencies that
i compile and customize extacly as it must be for DK. For ex, the big
puzzle OpenCV is compiled with all options disabled, that we don't use.
This prevent crashes especially with Intel thread management implemented in
OpenCV. Even if this lib provide great algorithms, they include features
that must be relocated in separated library. OpenCV is the most weird open
source project that i know.
3/ AppImage can be used as well, quickly, to test new features, without to
install anything. this permit to check if a bug have been fixed with mast
commit, without that user need to compile anything. So AppImage is the best
thing which arrive in open source world and especially in Linux. this
remove the complexity to user, permit to advance in the project quickly,
and permit all regression test by the users. So the loop between dev and
users is closed well.
4/ It take now 10 minutes to update AppImage bundle after a fix, on my
computer. You cannot do better. Integrating AppImage in a Continuous
Integration process is the miracle about software management.

So to resume :

1/ I support AppImage
2/ I will continuous to support AppImage in the future.
3/ If you don't like AppImage, ask to your packagers to update and support
digiKam application natively in your system, because we (digiKam team)
don't it instead.

Voilà

Gilles Caulier

2018-08-18 12:52 GMT+02:00 Rafael Linux User <rafael.linux.user at gmail.com>:

> As an (advanced) Linux user, I see appimages are just like "portables"
> applications in Windows. They are not intended to replace installed
> applications. They are practical solutions to specific situations, so the
> user has the chance to decide if that's what he need or not for those
> situations.
>
> For example, I have been using appimages of GIMP cause it was the simplest
> way to have in my system the 2.10 version. It was not the easier way to
> work with it, but for me to have it was a priority over commodity.
>
> And for beta testing I think it's a great solution, instead wait to have
> it in repositories or to compile by ourselves.
>
> Appimages are a great idea IMHO.
>
> Regards
>
> El vie., 17 ago. 2018 21:41, Jono pollard <jono.pollard at gmail.com>
> escribió:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> Love digikam but not thrilled with appimage. If I were a dev for digikam
>> wouldn't waste more resources using that system. It isn't intuitive and
>> leaves one wandering where to put the file and how to integrate it into
>> their system. I'd rather use an older version through my distributions
>> packaging system than have one random program use a completely obtuse
>> system. That's what I'm going to do but I wanted to share the opinions of a
>> regular digikam user. I get what appimage is about, but unless all of linux
>> switches to installing programs this way, it ends up just being clunky.
>>
>> Jono
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20180818/33d9e93a/attachment.html>