Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Gnome Flatpak #512

Open
kunkinkan opened this issue Jun 16, 2016 · 24 comments

Comments

@kunkinkan
Copy link

commented Jun 16, 2016

Since everyone seems to be listing Linux distribution tools, I'll add gnome flatpak to the list as well:

http://flatpak.org/

@develar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jun 16, 2016

Do you like flatpack or just report issue ;)?

@kunkinkan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Jun 16, 2016

AppImage, Flatpak and Snappy Apps are the 3 modern solutions at the moment. That's why I created the issue :-)

@develar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jun 21, 2016

Moved to backlog to keep issue list clear.

@develar develar closed this Jun 21, 2016

@develar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 5, 2016

AppImage #504 supported.

@grafenhofer

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 10, 2017

Flatpak is taking up in usage recently. It supports some features missing from appimage (support for automatic updates e.g. via proper integration in gnome software, KDE support seems to be coming,...). It could be time to reconsider the "backlog" tag.

@prcastro

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 22, 2017

I agree. Flatpak is becoming the standard not only in GNOME, but within KDE and probably ElementaryOS environments. Seems also to be a non-centralized way to keep applications reproducible and sandboxed, and seems way more secure than the alternatives. The number of contributors is also bigger than AppImage and Snap. GNOME Apps, Spotify, LibreOffice, Skype and Telegram already have Flatpak builds.

@black-snow

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 12, 2017

Anyone willing to tackle this? We have deb, rpm, AppImage and Snappy it would be a shame to not have flatpak as well.

@prcastro

This comment has been minimized.

@rgbkrk rgbkrk referenced this issue Oct 23, 2017

@develar develar added the backlog label Jan 31, 2018

@develar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jan 31, 2018

Sorry, moved to backlog for now.

@lbssousa

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 20, 2018

Flatpak is the last missing piece for electron-builder to become a trully complete tool for packaging Electron apps. Is it too hard to port electron-forge Flatpak implementation to electron-builder?

@laurent22

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 8, 2018

A Flatpak version is also something that people frequently ask for in my application, so support for it would be very welcome.

@develar develar reopened this Oct 28, 2018

@develar develar removed the backlog label Oct 28, 2018

@develar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Oct 28, 2018

As I am going to switch to vanilla gnome Linux from macOS, flatpack will be supported this/next month.

@spiral2k

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Dec 28, 2018

any updates? thanks for the amazing work!

@goncalossilva

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 8, 2019

@develar If you have yet to begin working on it, this is likely of interest: http://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/electron.html

@julian-alarcon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 28, 2019

There is Snap support available (almost all the features from Flatpack, I like it more), but yeah, will be great to have also Flatpack

@fbruetting

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 28, 2019

There is Snap support available (almost all the features from Flatpack, I like it more), but yeah, will be great to have also Flatpack

Snaps do not provide Flatpak’s biggest feature – which is being decentralized. Furthermore, Snaps are just on Ubuntu and it’s derivatives really supported, whereas you will find Flatpak support on way more distributions.

But it’s pretty obivious that not supporting Flatpak is a political decision here, as it’s also the case for Ubuntu.

@polarathene

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 18, 2019

As I am going to switch to vanilla gnome Linux from macOS, flatpack will be supported this/next month.

@develar Are you still using Gnome (or Linux for that matter)? It's understandable if you went back to macOS.

I'm not sure what's required to support Flatpak, did you get around to attempting it and run into any issues? Would a reference project supporting Flatpak electron builds be of help?

@TingPing

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 18, 2019

I'm not sure what's required to support Flatpak, did you get around to attempting it and run into any issues? Would a reference project supporting Flatpak electron builds be of help?

So there are two different ways to approach this:

  • Using Flatpak to build an electron app in a sandbox. This is what the linked repo tries to do.
  • Spitting out a .flatpak bundle (or maybe even commit into a repo) from a electron project. This is what this issue would be about.

There is sadly not a ton of overlap in those two tasks.

@snaggen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 18, 2019

@TingPing

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 18, 2019

@snaggen I'm not talking about the format, I'm talking about their usage.

electron-builder has no use for a project like Flathub which builds projects in a sandbox with the flatpak-builder tool.

It instead has use where an upstream project exports to their own infrastructure.

@polarathene

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 19, 2019

Spitting out a .flatpak bundle (or maybe even commit into a repo) from a electron project. This is what this issue would be about.

Ok, so would you say supporting .flatpak bundle output is difficult for electron-builder to support? Is there any particular issues that can be run into? If you have any idea how much work it'd be to add the support that'd be helpful too.

I'm not familiar with building flatpak apps, but perhaps if there is some guidance/advice in how to go about adding that support, I or someone else might be able to find the time to look into it ourselves and create a PR?

@TingPing

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 19, 2019

Ok, so would you say supporting .flatpak bundle output is difficult for electron-builder to support? Is there any particular issues that can be run into? If you have any idea how much work it'd be to add the support that'd be helpful too.

No I do not believe it would be that difficult. Just using the flatpak build-* commands to put things in the right place and export it should generally work fine.

See the man pages for flatpak-build-init, flatpak-build, flatpak-build-finish, flatpak-build-export.

Generally .flatpak bundles aren't very user friendly though, users lose out on simple updating. So it might be worth exposing the ability to export to a repository easily.

@clementlesne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 27, 2019

Hello, Flatpack would be truly awesome! And there is a lot of more hype for it than Snapcraft. I hope it will be soon included. Keep your good work!

@tidux

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 2, 2019

@TingPing adding the ability to publish to a repository would get you "publish to Flathub.org" basically for free. Flathub is the de facto standard distro agnostic place to host flatpaks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
You can’t perform that action at this time.