saying 'no code' from rivals seems highly misleading, and I can't seem to see a hard citation for this, in fact, it very directly contradicts this same sentence from the article
He also said that unlike SerenityOS, Ladybird will “leverage the greater OSS ecosystem,” meaning that it will use other open source libraries for some features.
it would be better to say they aren't relying on libraries and features from rivals. not that they will use "no code" from them, good code is good code afterall
Boring hit piece that way overblows some issues on the topic.
Yeah, can't say I really care about this, this seems like a bit of a nothing burger.
Trying to remain unbias, the super TLDR;
Time for my personal bias Im not sure how I can hide this other then spoiler, but ignore it if you don't want my very bias opinion;
spoiler
FDO for sure over stepped their bounds. FDO did wrongfully invoke their COC against hyprland's community, Their COC is extremely clear on it's "scope" https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/CodeOfConduct/ under which hyprland absolutely doesn't fall under. That being said, OFC FDO retains the right to ban anyone from their services as they please (I'll explain why this is extremely bad below). But they invoked the COC which is extremely important here.
Vaxry absolutely acted unprofessionally in publicizing this, on the other hand, I'm really glad he did because it's insane that FDO is attacking the hyprland community in the first place, which is an extremely self isolating community. It's very much "what happens in the discord is a discord thing". Outside of the discord, hyprland community is perfectly fine. I've not seen a single "Hyprland fan" go around shitting on anything else (granted this is hard to judge since you need to be given context of someone shitting on something, to be a hyprland fan), on the contary, I have seen many people publically shittying on vaxry on multiple forums.
FDO was in their right to ban Vaxry for publicizing the emails, but I don't think it was a good idea at all. They essentially punished Vaxry for airing their dirty laundry. Proving him right in the end. It's important to note, that given context, Drew's articles on Vaxry are insanely biased against him, with the intent to drum up hate towards vaxry (going so far as to imply Vaxry would call people the N-Word when giving support to people by using extremely misleading and cherry picked context)
The original emails are best explained by vaxry himself so check out his blog.
In the end, Vaxry acted unprofessionally and got banned for it, but FDO acted equally unprofessionally, and their actions greatly overstepped the rights they had (as far as enforcing COC goes, their original email)
Now WHY is FDO banning vaxry so important? Pretty much everything that matters in terms of linux gui development is on FDO's services. Wayland protocol discussion, Mesa, Wlroots etc. by banning vaxry from these services, he is pretty much no longer able to directly interact with the wayland community. (At least not without ban evasion or someone else acting as a proxy)
EDIT: I forgot my conclusions.
I strongly feel like FDO is using their position as the people who control linux to push their politics unto others. Hence Vaxry's original blog post How Freedesktop/RedHat harass other projects into submission
the issue isn't federation or anything like that, the issue is finding a repo hosting service in a dmca resilient country
OOB experience matters a LOT.
Literally never heard of it let alone know anyone who cares...
oh boy here we go I strongly disagree with this article
While complex .tar archives (like firefox) may seem messy, they integrate many different things. An installer script takes care of placing a .desktop entry, you can have an updater script, a LICENSE, README and more. Those are all missing with Appimages.
.tar ARE messy, sometimes they don't work right, dep conflicts, etc. An installer script can be shipped with an appimage anyways. Moot point IMO
Apps installed with the system package manager get their .desktop Entry in /usr/share/applications, installed Flatpaks get their entry linked to ~/.local/share/flatpak/exports/share/applications/, user overrides and other installs can be put in ~/.local/share/applications/.
Appimages have no desktop entry, so they have (currently) no icon on Wayland and they don't appear in your app list. Desktop entries are a standard, used by everytthing but Appimages.
see above
Instead users follow strange habits like placing the files on their desktop, which is a highly discouraged "Windows workflow" (symbolic image) and not even supported on many Desktop Environments, most notably GNOME.
Who discourages it? I personally prefer this myself, lack of desktop icons is a common complain for stuff like GNOME...
This is both a usability and a security issue. Traditional Linux apps, even if they are cross platform, don't have updater services, as package managers are way better at doing that.
I disagree that this is better. A personal issue but I Much prefer when apps can update themselves.
This means, packing as an Appimage either requires to implement an updating service, on a platform that doesn't need that, or to have no updates at all.
Instead users need to follow an RSS feed, get a mail, or manually check for updates, which is horrible UX. Then how do they update?
Is this really a massive issue? There have been appimage stores in the past. Self updating appimages really isn't that hard either. If this was a massive issue, you could do something like obtanium for android which could easily automate the process.
Appimages don't even have a central place where you can find them, not to mention download them. This is extremely insecure. Modern Application stores and every well made Linux repository uses cryptographic (mostly gpg) verification, which secures the authenticity of the software. You can be sure you downloaded the real package.
I'd argue it makes little difference. But yes, Downloading things from the internet is more unsafe then downloading from a repo or a "curated" service. So we can grant one here.
There is no updating mechanism. On Android you may also update by downloading .apk files, but once installed, the .apk needs to be signed with the same key, otherwise updates are blocked. With Appimages... you just delete the old .appimage file, download the new one, change the name to remove the version and hope your .desktop entry didn't break.
This is how you get malware.
the risks seem blown out of proportion here. As long as you are downloading from the same place, the risks are significantly smaller in reality, not gone, but smaller.
They are not well maintained
There is a well known "bug" on modern Ubuntu, where Appimages lost their "works on every Linux Distro", because they are built for the outdated libfuse2, while Ubuntu now uses libfuse3. The fix is to install the outdated version of libfuse (!), and this is still not fixed.
An application format, that is incompatible with the latest version of its core dependency, is broken.
This is a very minor issue, i've had way more issues with traditional repo packages then I have had with appimages.
Lack of Sandboxing ...
I find this to be a benefit myself, I have had countless headaches with flatpak applications and their sandboxing. everything from devices not being recognized, weird storage issues and more.
Random location ...
Another moot issue. $HOME/.local/bin is an XDG standard, so unless we pretend that XDG standards aren't "one of the major standards" this is just wrong. https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html
Duplicated libraries
Appimages bloat the system. They include all the libraries they need, and unlike system packages or Flatpaks, they don't share a single libary. If users would really install every Software as Appimages, they would waste insane amounts of storage space.
This also completely discourages efficient and up to date packaging, and the attached risk of outdates libraries is hidden away in that .appimage archive.
and? When you need only a couple appimage files, space I find is smaller then flatpak, it only becomes when you need a lot of applications.
Appimages are not needed Flatpak solved many Linux desktop issues at once ...
None of these provide reasons as to why appimages aren't needed. Appimages still offer a lot, for one I can just download and run it I don't need to worry about installing and uninstalling application when I just want to try it, I don't need to muck about trying to get an app into flathub or starting my own repo, when a user has a problem, I can just tell them to run the new appimage instead of trying to get them to compile it.
Appimages also let me do fine grained control over the dependencies. No unexpected runtime updates, I can compile the deps with flags/features I want to support, and disable flags/features I don't want to support, Users don't need to download a stupid appstore or use CLI (not a single appstore i've used to date isn't hot garbage, I hope cosmic-store will be different).
Manjaro constantly winds up having really weird issues, they hold packages back in order to make it more stable, but it honestly just broke things far more often then upstream arch did for me. Manjaro and it's community is also riddled with really weird issues. It was pointed out to me a while ago that manjaro did some updates that broke grub customizer, and when people were trying to figure out what broke and how to fix it, Manjaro instead not only removed grub customizer, but made it conflict with the grub they had so people working on trying to fix it got a shovel full of go fuckyourself in the face
that feeling when you can remeber what shade of orange emoji you used on your password
I never do the latter anymore. was downloading a pretty rare dvd rip awhile ago I only found after a really long time. download was slow, for about 4 days I was downloading and then seeder went offline and afaik never came back up. now I try to make sure if im the only seed to try and make sure they get priority to decrease the chances of that happening
EDIT: btw props to btdigg, I did eventually find it in some collection thanks to that
right? gotta wonder why it was even posted in the first place