Feature Request: Flatpak Support

[N-Hertstein]

While it is amazing that linux is supported with the desktop app, updates still leave something to be desired.

My recommendation is creating a flatpak. It works across most linux distributions, supports updates trough the flatpak package manager and that's about it.

No need to create a .deb .rpm and pacman file.
It's abot as universal as an appimage (afaik)

[TheOneRing]

Sadly, Flatpak is not just a package type but a different ecosystem and overhead through sandboxing.
We don't plan to provide a Flatpak, but we would gladly support the community in providing Flatpak.

[github-actions]

This issue was marked stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. Remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 7 days.

[github-actions]

The issue was marked as stale for 7 days and closed automatically.

[JannoTjarks]

Hi, just a small request to rethink the decision.

AppImages have a lot of disadvantages and are on a lot of modern Linux distributions not even supported, like Aeon Desktop.

https://github.com/boredsquirrel/dont-use-appimages

Currently I have to extract all essential data from the appimage to run it locally, because my distribution does not allow appimages.

I understand,that this adds more complexity, but I am sure, that A LOT of Linux users would appreciate a dedicated Flatpak.

[MrRulf]

+1 for the flatpak relevance.
Beside all the advantages like auto updates, sandboxing etc. it's also way more accessible and easier to manage than AppImages, specially for non power users.
With distributions like bazzite, cachyos but also steamos coming up linux is getting more accessible and attracting less technical people - I could even imagine my grandma prefering one of those distros compared to windows, if she only uses an appstore like bazaar and a browser.
Of course she'd need help setting the client for opencloud up, but once that's done she could pretty much do alone because with a flatpak for opencloud and a repo it gets updates from she wouldn't have to care about where the AppImage is stored, if fuse2 or fuse3 is needed, other special cases that might come up with appimages cuz u can have them quite everywhere etc.

I do think an official flatpak should be the way, for these three reasons:

1. For company use: in my experience companies don't like packages from third party sources. Community packages feel like a gray area there, but considering the target group (from my understanding) of the software this is something where it's better to be in the greens.
2. A release on flathub is not possible without owning the domain, so it'd even have to be a unofficial repo
3. Considering all the advantages of flatpak I could see it being the preferred download/install source for linux. I think that would be a good reason to make it at least a official method.

Now of course, this is just my opinion and a suggestion, I hope it doesn't sound like anything else.

[NeoTheFox]

https://github.com/NeoTheFox/eu.opencloud.desktop

Here is a WIP manifest. It builds, but as @JannoTjarks mentioned, I would love to see an official build, since unverified apps are very hard to get through the security audits.

[pojntfx]

I wanted to try out OpenCloud's desktop client and also ran into this issue. I'm on GNOME OS, which only has Flatpak as a package manager. KDE Linux has the same constraints. For users of a Steam Deck or Steam Machine, Flatpak is also the way to go. AppImages don't run on these modern distros anymore because they depend on a deprecated library with lots of known security issues: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-build-meta/-/issues/1072. In general, the Linux desktop has been converging towards Flatpak being the way new apps get distributed for a while now.

As for "different ecosystem and overhead through sandboxing" - Flatpak uses Bubblewrap for it's sandboxing, which doesn't incur overhead in the same way something like gVisor or KVM would if that is the concern: https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap?tab=readme-ov-file#sandboxing

There are also serious concerns about AppImage's governance model. This is the lead developer behind the tech: https://x.com/probonopd/status/1985078104964968919

[TheOneRing]

I know that you all love flatpack. But stating that appimages are deprecated technology and don't run on modern systems is just not true.
Our appimages use the latest runtime which does not require libfuse2.

All you need to do is to make the appimage executable and run it.
And yes you don't get a fancy package manager and have to update it manually.

We don't plan to provide any flatpack support in the near future.

[N-Hertstein]

I know that you all love flatpack. But stating that appimages are deprecated technology and don't run on modern systems is just not true. Our appimages use the latest runtime which does not require libfuse2.

All you need to do is to make the appimage executable and run it. And yes you don't get a fancy package manager and have to update it manually.

We don't plan to provide any flatpack support in the near future.

All that said.
You can't expect to market to businesses and also expect IT teams to go and script appimage deployments and updates when nextcloud can provide them with a flatpak. Not having one is just a bad business decision as an EU company where governments are slowly trying to leave windows behind.

And regular users too. Why go and manually manage your app when there's an alternative with more youtube videos in your package manager.

This refusal to accomodate users will cost you marketshare both now and in the future.