Why Flatpak? Isn't Snap enough?

[Sriram Ramkrishna]

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 8:10 AM Simon McVittie <smcv at collabora.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 02 Jan 2018 at 18:33:53 +0000, N. W. wrote:
> > Why develop Flatpak and Snap? Why not collaborate on Snap only?
>
>
> Flatpak also has advantages over Snap for some uses. Two of those are that
> its narrower scope makes it more focused on the use-cases it does support,
> and it provides useful sandboxing even on systems that do not enable a LSM
> or enable an incompatible non-AppArmor LSM (AppArmor and SELinux can't be
> "stacked", the ability to stack major LSMs is a time-consuming feature to
> develop, and some distributions already require SELinux, so this matters
> a lot). You'll notice those are diametrically opposed to the advantages
> I mentioned for Snap: you can't have both, and the one you should choose
> as more important depends on what your goals are. Different goals lead to
> different choices, and those choices can be advantages or disadvantages,
> depending on what you want to achieve.
>
> Open source development is not zero-sum - many of the things Flatpak
> developers work on also help Snap, and vice versa.
>
>
>
This is such a great response that it should be go into a FAQ.

sri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/flatpak/attachments/20180103/76d0a9f3/attachment.html>