Replace built-in programs with Flatpak versions?

[mzs112000]

I don't know if this is already in the works or not, so here is a suggestion...

Lets replace all of programs from a normal install with their Flatpak versions.
Essentially, get rid of Brasero, LibreOffice, Firefox, GIMP, VLC, Thunderbird, Transmisssion, HexChat, etc, and install the ones from Flathub.

Reasons to do it:
1.) Always have the most up-to-date version of each program, even years after that LM version is shipped.
2.) All programs are sandboxed, increases security.
3.) Programs that require different versions of the same libraries and such will not conflict or cause update problems.
4.) Takes packaging burden off of the LM team or the Ubuntu team, and puts it on upstream(where it belongs IMO).
5.) You get each program exactly as upstream built it, so you know any bugs don't come from Ubuntu or LM packaging.

Reasons not to do it:
1.) It might increase the size of the LM install media.
2.) Updates might eat up more bandwidth.
3.) The OS might be a bit slower, especially on older computers.
4.) It reduces the potential for customization by Ubuntu team or the Mint team.
5.) Due to the sandboxed nature, people with a large number of programs might see disk space usage balloon to unreasonable levels.

So, what does everyone think? Is it a good idea going foward?

[BenTrabetere]

I will find another distro if Linux Mint takes this direction. I will leave without any hesitation, but with a lot of remorse. But I will leave. Flatpak may be a solution to a problem, but maintaining mainline programs like the ones you mentioned is not that problem.

[ajgringo619]

As much as I like Flatpak, I don't think this is a good idea. One of Mint's most attractive features is stability, something that the latest-and-greatest packages can't possibly ensure. If you want to see what happens to a distro that heavily uses an alternative package manager, try the latest Ubuntu. It is full of snaps, which significantly slows down booting.

[AZgl1800]

I am trying to get a video editor to work, and it is in Flatpak,
and it will not install and run.

Bad idea IMO.

I never have these type problems with *.deb files, they just install and work.

[catweazel]

1.) It might increase the size of the LM install media.
2.) Updates might eat up more bandwidth.
3.) The OS might be a bit slower, especially on older computers.
4.) It reduces the potential for customization by Ubuntu team or the Mint team.
5.) Due to the sandboxed nature, people with a large number of programs might see disk space usage balloon to unreasonable levels.

So, what does everyone think? Is it a good idea going foward?

It's a ridiculous idea.

[mahmutelmas06]

Core applications related to Mint project or operating system such as Nemo or terminal should be deb. But other 3rd party apps like Firefox or transmission should be flatpak which are not mint project. You focus your own software and let other software providers publish their fixes.

[gm10]

Terrible idea. Don't install an LTS distribution if you want bleeding edge, direct from upstream. That makes no sense at all, not even a little. And I won't even dive into all the other disadvantages of flatpaks that you didn't mention.

[trytip]

Terrible idea. Don't install an LTS distribution if you want bleeding edge, direct from upstream. That makes no sense at all, not even a little. And I won't even dive into all the other disadvantages of flatpaks that you didn't mention.

it makes perfect sense. remember that time you installed kernel 4.19 on an LTS distro called Linux Mint? but seriously i wouldn't mind so much flatpaks or snaps if they wouldn't stick themselves to startup. there should be a kernel module that loads ability to run these bundled pieces of s...oftware and not take away resources. i have one freking snap installed and the core of the snapd always wants to be updated leaving 3 of it's version using extra hardspace and has 5+ entries in systemd service

[gm10]

it makes perfect sense. remember that time you installed kernel 4.19 on an LTS distro called Linux Mint?

You know full well that there's a difference between what I do on my own time and what's a reasonable default configuration for Linux Mint. As I remarked elsewhere recently, I added full mainline kernel support to my own Update Manager, but I only made the removal option available for Mint 19.1. You have to keep the target audience in mind.

Mint advertises 5 years of support. That's mostly untrue already but if you switch the default software to flatpaks and the kernels to mainline it becomes entirely untrue because all of those are unsupported.

Again, this thread is only about the default configuration of Linux Mint. Everybody thinking they need flatpaks instead of the official supported packages can always remove the latter and install the former instead, just like I can install a mainline kernel as long as I realize I won't get support for it.

[trytip]

@gm10
ah, c'mon you know i'm just busting your chops i do quite a lot of extras to mint that a normal user would never begin to understand. most new users don't understand why software is left behind using older version when there's a new version ready for download. they are used to the way windows works.
took me quite some time to understand the use of ppa which again is frowned upon, for instance i just tried to install avidemux and it wasn't in my synaptic (mint19). then on top of that i installed it and didn't install all the codecs and demuxers it needs to function and then on top of that it couldn't even convert a simple .mp4 to .mpeg so i had to resort to ffmpeg but that's besides the point

mint relies way too much on ubuntu repos and we're at their mercy. if mint is going to be it's own distro it should have an arsenal of software available in mint repos, otherwise mint is just ubuntu with a skin

[gm10]

ah, c'mon you know i'm just busting your chops

I did but I figured others incl. the OP might not so I figured it worth it to elaborate a little.

mint relies way too much on ubuntu repos and we're at their mercy. if mint is going to be it's own distro it should have an arsenal of software available in mint repos, otherwise mint is just ubuntu with a skin

Well, that's what it is though, plus a DE.

Also the Mint team has neither the manpower nor the know-how to support something the size of the Ubuntu repos. They are already struggling with their own repos and tools. I have to use the Timeshift PPA to get bug fixes despite Timeshift being in the Mint repo, and there's a ton of bugs in the Mint tools waiting to be fixed. I submitted fixes for a bunch of them but even reviewing those is taking months. They could never handle a bigger package base.

[bassplayer]

So, what does everyone think? Is it a good idea going foward?

No

[JerryF]

I don't know if this is already in the works or not, so here is a suggestion...

Lets replace all of programs from a normal install with their Flatpak versions.
...
So, what does everyone think? Is it a good idea going foward?

No. Bad idea.

[all41]

I still stand for a barebones Mint where I can choose which packages get installed.
Mostly I would choose repository offerings though and not flatpak

[trytip]

... Also the Mint team has neither the manpower nor the know-how to support something the size of the Ubuntu repos. They are already struggling with their own repos and tools. I have to use the Timeshift PPA to get bug fixes despite Timeshift being in the Mint repo, and there's a ton of bugs in the Mint tools waiting to be fixed. I submitted fixes for a bunch of them but even reviewing those is taking months. They could never handle a bigger package base.

this is where the use of an optional community repo would come in handy. a playground for mint users that have the time resources and the know how to build and apply patches. the same way arch linux has their AUR (arch user repository) which again is frowned upon by arch elitists. they dislike the impurity of user built packages and yet at the same time a lot of software is not available in the official arch repos.

so this comes back to using all in one bundles of snaps, flatpaks and appimages which no one seems to like. KaOS linux has a much smaller team and it also has their user repository which is pretty well maintained but unlike arch KaOS welcomes it. pclinuxos is even smaller team and it relies on it's users to submit source packages into a test repo, a user group of testers try it out and then it's released into the official repo.

[gm10]

this is where the use of an optional community repo would come in handy. a playground for mint users that have the time resources and the know how to build and apply patches. the same way arch linux has their AUR (arch user repository) which again is frowned upon by arch elitists. they dislike the impurity of user built packages and yet at the same time a lot of software is not available in the official arch repos.

I can understand both sides of the argument, you don't have to be an elitist to see some of the downsides of the approach. I'm not opposed, but I don't expect it to happen. In the meantime we've got PPAs available to everyone.

[all41]

this is where the use of an optional community repo would come in handy. a playground for mint users that have the time resources and the know how to build and apply patches. the same way arch linux has their AUR (arch user repository) which again is frowned upon by arch elitists. they dislike the impurity of user built packages and yet at the same time a lot of software is not available in the official arch repos.

I can understand both sides of the argument, you don't have to be an elitist to see some of the downsides of the approach. I'm not opposed, but I don't expect it to happen. In the meantime we've got PPAs available to everyone.

I think it's a matter of trust, as it is for Win users--except the source code would be published.

[mahmutelmas06]

The guys who are against flatpak idea, you are missing something.
Deb packages are not how they have been created at first. It evoluated.
So flatpaks also will evolue to fit to needs. For exmp. we need a special command to give external hdd access to each flatpak but this will be fixed very soon.

Why linux is still behind the windows has simple answer. Each linux dist. release has to create its own version reporistry and each distro has its own software depenceies. So software developers cant fallow this unstandarized system.

And also if u install a software in linux and if you are a beginner, you may break the whole system.

Linux should renew itself if it wants to compete Windows since windows renew itself too.

I also support Fedora's modularity which is off topic.

[gm10]

The guys who are against flatpak idea, you are missing something.
Deb packages are not how they have been created at first. It evoluated.
So flatpaks also will evolue to fit to needs. For exmp. we need a special command to give external hdd access to each flatpak but this will be fixed very soon.

Even if all the issues with flatpaks were to be fixed, that changes nothing about the fact that flatpaks are unsupported. This is an LTS release, you cannot make the unsupported software the default. The whole flatpak argument dies on that alone for me, although even without that a bunch of the other drawbacks which cannot be fixed because they are systemic lead me to opt-out of the system.

I have no problem with flatpaks as an optional software source but I would have a major problem with Mint trying to force them on me.

[ajgringo619]

+1, gm10. To me, the beauty of Linux/UNIX is that we can try out new software without impacting the base system at all. Need a newer library? Build it yourself and point your software to it. Flatpaks (and Snaps, for that matter) just give us an easy way to do this.