I looked into Flatpak and while I agree that it seems technically superior and more well-supported than Snap, it is severely handicapped when it comes to the distribution of CLI apps. Having users type flatpak run org.symbolicsoft.Verifpal every time seems to be a very bad idea.

We will stick to Snap for now, but please bring this up again in the future in case:

1. Flatpak evolves,
2. Another suitable contender to Snap appears.

Thank you,

Nadim Kobeissi
Symbolic Software https://symbolic.software
Sent from office

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 9:17 PM rugk <rugk+mailinglist@posteo.de> wrote:
I already provided the links on why snap is basically not "for Linux",
but "for Ubuntu" despite it's otherwise claims, and the technical
reasons, e.g. that it does not support sandboxing.

Though flatpak is intended for GUI apps, I dunno if Verifpal would work
(it can only be used as an add-on in VSCode AFAIK).

Am 21.04.2020 17:04 schrieb Nadim Kobeissi:
> Dear rugk,
> Currently, Verifpal is available on one package manager per operating
> system:
> - Windows: Scoop (https://scoop.sh)
> - Linux: Snapcraft (https://snapcraft.io/)
> - macOS: Homebrew (https://brew.sh/)
> Does a compelling case exist for us to carry the additional
> maintenance cost of adopting two package managers (Snapcraft and
> Flatpak) for Linux? I do not see one.
> Thanks,
> Nadim Kobeissi
> Symbolic Software • https://symbolic.software
>> On 21 Apr 2020, at 4:13 PM, rugk via Verifpal
>> <verifpal@lists.symbolic.software> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> It would be nice if you could publish this as a
>> [flatpak](https://flatpak.org/) on [flathub](https://flathub.org/)
>> e.g.
>> Flatpaks are a new software distribution mechanism for Linux distros,
>> can thus installed on any distro and are easy to update.
>> Here is [how to get
>> started](http://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/getting-started.html).
>> BTW I personally would prefer flatpak. In contrast to snap, you can
>> also self-host it, so you stay in control, and it is widely supported.
>> (snap is not so nice to setup in many distros and snap's security
>> depends on AppArmor, which is not always available in many distros)
>> Also – in contrast to snaps – flatpaks do not only claim to be
>> distro-independent, but [actually
>> are](https://kamikazow.wordpress.com/2018/06/08/adoption-of-flatpak-vs-snap-2018-edition/).
>> Best regards,
>> rugk
>> _______________________________________________
>> Verifpal mailing list
>> Verifpal@lists.symbolic.software
>> https://lists.symbolic.software/mailman/listinfo/verifpal