11–20 of 201 posts
I love Ubuntu, it's been my daily driver for over a decade now but if they continue with going against the community on this nonsense this will be a strong indication for people like me that an era has come to an end and it's time to move on. It used to be a community focused distro. This bs feels outright user-hostile.
Well… what, five years later, here we are. They are still trucking on although the Linux community at large has turned against them, yet they remain in their echo chamber of a forum and don’t see it, convinced it will all work out or some crap.
If you create a set of policies that users can choose from, you have limited your usefulness to just those cases that fit in those policies that you have implemented.
If you choose a single policy for everyone, only people who are willing to use that policy will use your system.
These patterns repeat across operating systems, services and applications.
They very much do not care about the end-user with Snap, only how to appear attractive to potential customers.
The snap thing makes me want to switch distro (for work) from ubuntu. Unfortunately we have some benefits from using ubuntu as the common platform for less divergence from each other
But, unless I'm missing something about latest or future releases, isn't it still optional? Can't you use apt instead and uninstall snapd altogether?
I'd agree that needing to uninstall instead of opt-in is an annoyance, and that user-hostile actions tend to be a slippery slope..
> The issue that makes us resist the idea of simply disabling updates altogether is that very often that will mean never update rather than update at someone’s discretion, and then we’re getting back to some of the problems that got us here in the first place. I’m sorry, who owns the machine here?
To offset this, two channels of releases can be maintained - one for security fixes, another for general features etc. But again here, we run into problems where maintenance of two channels isn't economical, and you end up testing security fixes on various versions.
How can these be addressed if upgrades are not forced, are there standard processes followed that provide the best compromise for both vendors and end users?
Snap developers have refused to rename $HOME/snap to be less visible for nearly as long, they have and are shipping very broken software, all while using update methods that corrupted people's data unannounced until very recently (the update mechanism made data directories non-writable unless you enable some experimental option). They very much do not care about the end-user with Snap, only how to appear attractive t…
Of course, compared with other platforms and auto updates, it is clear why app developers prefer and expect to be in charge of updates.