With the recent announcement that Ubuntu across the board is dropping support for Flatpak, I'm curious does flatpak have any future in Zorin OS? From what I can tell to my knowledge the only real future flatpak has is in Linux Mint. Given how much I like ZorinOS I am understandably curious.
3 Likes
The ZorinGroup is about providing options and not limiting users. While I can not speak for what they choose, it would make sense that they defy Gnome's decision and continue to include flatpak in the software options.
Depending on their decisions, we may be looking at a completely different DE. I expect that they will not be removing things because Gnome says so.
4 Likes
I don't think it will have any impact on Zorin OS at all.
1 Like
I guess my point was will flatpak be dropped from ZorinOS aswell? Cuz i use it a lot. Sorry if i am too novice in my understandings
1 Like
thanks 337harvey
When I install Zorin OS, the first thing I do is uninstall Flatpak and Snap. I have never been inconvenienced by doing so.
I think these decisions should be made by distros and not the role of DEs.
2 Likes
I agree with you completely! Distros and their devs are the OS creators. This displays Gnome's attempt to control and manipulate in the Linux community. Red hat hasn't gotten so bold, yet.
1 Like
In truth, only the ZorinGroup can directly address this question.
For this, tagging @AZorin @zorink (you guys have been getting tagged a lot lately...) for review.
Hopefully, they can address your concern shortly. They may need time to review their options, direction and have a good understanding of Ubuntu (Canonical) pressure on this.
Because Ubuntu is not just dropping Flatpak, but also urging Derivatives and other distros to drop Flatpak, as well.
I need to remain objectively fair:
On the surface, it looks like a ploy to promote and push Snap over Flatpak. And... this may be the case.
But it is equally possible that Canonical has discovered some grave concerns about Flatpak. It is a pretty heavy deal for a company to urge the boycotting of a product. What if they have a good reason for it? I do not yet know any information to shed light on that.
With apologies to @337harvey ,
Flatpak was developed by Gnome Developers and currently has strong preference and support by Gnome Foundation.
It is Canonical that is shunning Flatpak. This is a move that is undoubtedly upsetting to Gnome.
6 Likes
Thank you for your concise reply and for enlightening me as to directing my question properly, I really appreciate it.
3 Likes
If the relationship between Gnome and Canonical goes bad, the centralization of the Linux community will fail. This would be a welcome development.
1 Like
It truly is amazing and impressive how very neatly you summarized this.
I cannot express agreement strongly enough.
I have a great deal of difficulty in properly expressing myself, sometimes. And I struggle to properly convey the intensity of a principle without distracting with the object.
Gnome is a great desktop in many fundamental ways. The same applies for Snap and for Flatpak. Or Wayland, for that matter. Whether a minimal desktop or a containerized package management; they have clear and definite pros to their application and use.
Each of the above are examples of things that seek to solve certain problems.
I do dislike what they are doing however.
It may be easier if I change the example from Software - to cars.
I do not dislike Chevrolet. Or Dodge. Or Hyundai.
I have equal respect for a person that chooses Chevrolet or Hyundai.
I also support the principle of Right To Repair. Because it is fundamentally important that the owner of the vehicle have the means to fully repair and maintain the equipment that they own.
I do dislike what Chevrolet is doing. This does not mean that someone who likes Chevy is bad - because they likely also do not like what Chevy is doing, even if they like Chevy as a useful and reliable product. the change from the ability to repair as the owner to needing specialty tools to access hidden vehicle components is not liked.
This is: needlessly increasing the expense of repairing by making direct changes to inhibit owner repairs; create a problem where one did not exist before and to try to convince the End User to "welcome" these changes.
With Gnome, Flatpak and Snap, it is no different.
With Wayland, it is different: Wayland seeks to solve a problem, not create new ones in order to increase a minority control. However, Wayland has other fundamental problems.
It becomes problematic when this is perceived as simple "gnome-bashing" and the reader then tries to "defend" Gnome instead of examining the validity or merit of the Hard Questions.
And there are very hard questions about the direction Gnome, Redhat, Flatpak and Snap all will do in the Linux Environment as a whole. Reducing diversity, choice and user control. Making it harder for end users to troubleshoot - to repair - their machine.
And let's be honest; this is partly due to Linux as a User Desktop being Free Cost. This allows little regard to End Home Users and preference toward paying Corporate Interest.
This Forum stands as a clear demonstration. Many End Users arrive at the door uncertain and confused. And they do not want it just fixed for them. Time and time again, what we observe directly is end users willing to learn, willing to take the steps, willing to open terminal, willing to enter commands, willing to put in effort.
This misconception that the End Users do not care, that they just want it done for them and handed to them is repeatedly demonstrably False.
The vast majority just need to know what the proper command is; what the next step is; some assurance that they will not break something. They want to be part of the solution. They just need a little confidence is all.
Very few ask that it be fixed on their behalf without effort. It is - rare.
And when they get a sense of direction and solve their problem, look how they go over the Moon. How happy they are with accomplishment and success. What does it mean to deprive the End User of this?
The centralization of Linux cannot abide.
3 Likes
It does not mean the Whole Community, but rather the Developers being centralized, with the end users separate.
2 Likes
I'm so happy to have sparked such interesting conversations, i'm defo getting a education, thanks Aravisian and y'all. 
2 Likes
The advantage of the Linux OS is that it can be built like a car. In other words, developers who build components and developers who assemble them can focus on their respective roles. The result is a wide variety of distributions for users to choose from.
1 Like
The Stephen Fry video on celebrating 30 years of GNU/Linux sums up the ethos nicely:
I wrongfully intermingle gnome and canonical. To me, they aren't that much different.
1 Like
Don't forget to include RedHat and Fedora!
Flatpak will have to be installed after installation of Ubuntu like in many other distros. Ubuntu developers can't verify the integrity of flatpaks, so they become a user choice.
1 Like
Sorry, but a sandbox-system has nothing to do with 'a right to repair' .
Canonical and Ubuntu Pro are really intended for the professional market in the mix with Microsoft's WSL-program. Migrating servers, all servers, out there would be a severe cost, and on top it would cost fortunes in new developments of existing configs and software running.
Snap is nothing more than a isolation of 3rd party software (in global) away from vital system core files. So the safety of Ubuntu, Linux, goes on that matter much more high than running 'open angled' Flatpaks in a system.
Open Source needs a little more prudency in the potentional abuse of e.g. commercial extra software. Google Chrome is there an exeption I hear you say already ..... Google is a Gold Certified Kernel Developer at the round table of coders on Kernels. Google's aim is, of course, to mix-in their Clouds inside the harmony of a regular Ubuntu, or Zorin for that matter, so they do have a high trusted agreement with Canonical.
A regular user has no issue on this little story now, but the gap in the market is of course that Ubuntu Pro just might not be the OS you really want at all. While a full build-up Zorin could be just the OS of Linux that brings Ubuntu for Home, and professional (non Cloud), use in the first place.
There is really even no need at all for Zorin to be as addaptive to Windows-versions, as they better would be aiming to 'lower down' Ubuntu Pro to a Zorin - Home, full option or not, Linux system for everyday's use.
Flatpak was learned, thanks to Mint, that it does not do what it promisses to do. Lots of bugs, severe unpatched bugs, lots of app-crashes and no safety at all on a wide open 'sandbox' that is no more really than a big regular folder/ /
1 Like
Zorin isn't an official Ubuntu Flavor, so Zorin can include the flatpak framework in their isos if they choose to do so.
5 Likes