Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-28 Thread Miika Turkia
On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > > On Dec 28, 2017, at 8:50 PM, Miika Turkia wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > >> >> I could be wrong (that's one of my defining strength - I am

Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-28 Thread Dirk Hohndel
> On Dec 28, 2017, at 8:50 PM, Miika Turkia wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Dirk Hohndel > wrote: > > I could be wrong (that's one of my defining strength - I am wrong a lot). But > here's my analysis: > >

Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-28 Thread Miika Turkia
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > > I could be wrong (that's one of my defining strength - I am wrong a lot). > But here's my analysis: > > About 2/3 of our users are supported with one single binary, the Windows > installer. > Another 20% of our users are

Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-21 Thread Dirk Hohndel
On December 21, 2017 6:19:45 PM PST, Philip Balister wrote: > >Don't forget the dinosaurs (like me) that build from source :) Those cause me the least work. /D ___ subsurface mailing list subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org

Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-21 Thread Thiago Macieira
On quinta-feira, 21 de dezembro de 2017 13:15:53 -02 Dirk Hohndel wrote: > Snap is a Canonical effort and as such is receiving at best "lip-service" > level support from the other distros. FlatPak was very much developed by > Red Hat as a response to Snap and as a direct competitor. As a result >

Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-21 Thread Lubomir I. Ivanov
On 21 December 2017 at 17:15, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > > On Dec 21, 2017, at 6:54 AM, Henrik B A wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Dirk Hohndel wrote: >> >> Snap and Flatpak both are different takes on what we already have with >>

Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-21 Thread Dirk Hohndel
> On Dec 21, 2017, at 6:54 AM, Henrik B A wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Dirk Hohndel > wrote: > Snap and Flatpak both are different takes on what we already have with > AppImage. > The goal of AppImage was to have

Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-21 Thread Henrik B A
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > Snap and Flatpak both are different takes on what we already have with > AppImage. > The goal of AppImage was to have fewer builds to worry about. And it > brilliantly does that. > So unless there is something that is a)

Re: Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-21 Thread Dirk Hohndel
> On Dec 21, 2017, at 1:30 AM, Henrik B A <hen...@synth.no> wrote: > > Has anyone looked into how feasible it would be to build Subsurface as a > Snap? It would be an alternative to the AppImage. > > Ref. https://docs.snapcraft.io/build-snaps/c > <https://d

Subsurface as a Snap?

2017-12-21 Thread Henrik B A
Has anyone looked into how feasible it would be to build Subsurface as a Snap? It would be an alternative to the AppImage. Ref. https://docs.snapcraft.io/build-snaps/c Cheers, Henrik ___ subsurface mailing list subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org http