[digiKam-users] appimage

[Jono pollard]

All I can say is that at least flatpack easily integrates into the rest of
the system. Appimage is more like windows or mac where you can just run a
program from where ever. Which can obviously be convenient but it's a
nightmare when literally every other program is well integrated into the
system. You guys do whatever you like, I'm just letting you know as a user
what the experience is like. And it ain't ideal. I think sometimes devs
forget that regular people are going to be using the stuff they spend so
much time and effort on. Thought I'd offer a little feedback. Like I said
previously, I am a big fan of the software in general and appreciate what
you guys do.

Jono

On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Flat pack vs AppImage : this is a good question
>
> 2 years ago I was contacted by the AppImage Lead developer to propose a
> digikam bundle
>
> I this tile I was already take a look to the bundles for Linux. Flatpack
> was not really documented and AppImage very well. With the help of
> AppImage, the Rita team which already provide an AppImage bundle I created
> a first version in 3 weeks with the minimum features. Since this time I
> create a lots of bash scripts to create the bundles with a good
> documentation. This include also windows with a cross compilation through
> mixe, and macOS using Mac ports.
>
> Flatpack is more mature now and more secure from the start to send box the
> application better than AppImage.
> AppImage has now the same concept, so there is no more advantage to use
> flatpack.
>
> So I will not investigate to create a flatpack version of DK. If someone
> want to do it, no problem, but I maintain the AppImage and my time is
> limited
>
> Other important point : keep provide a bundle factory including AppImage,
> windows installer and Mac package
> This use step by step the craft framework. This can be fine for small
> applications, but for digikam we need something we’ll customized.
>
> https://binary-factory.kde.org/
>
> Perhaps, in the future, we will use this service, but for the moment, the
> do scripts do the job well since a very long time, where craft framework
> still under development ( I receive the mails from the team)
>
> Voilà for this story. Packaging is complex job and take a while, but a
> complex application badly packaged cannot work properly and finally, users
> will report the application as completely bugous.
>
> Gilles caulier
>
>
> Le sam. 18 août 2018 à 17:22, <digikam at 911networks.com> a écrit :
>
>> On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 14:35:12 +0200
>> Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > 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.
>>
>> I like the principle of appimage. It allows me to use DK. Currently,
>> I'm on xfce. It makes my life simple.
>>
>> Question to Gilles:
>>
>> appimage vs flatpak.
>>
>> More and more are using flatpak to include everything. My son, in
>> academia/bioinfomatics requires that people send their software in
>> "flatpaks" which is becoming quite well accepted in academia.
>>
>> BTW, Isn't GIMP also using flatpak with Redhat supporting the project?
>>
>> --
>> sknahT
>>
>> vyS
>>
> --
> Send with Gmail Mobile
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20180818/6e75578b/attachment.html>