Very true.
(And I’ve been using pop for a while now… and I ALSO don’t know how to write it. 
)
DistroTube’s take during a Q&A: Ask DT! You Might Even Get An Answer. (No Promises Though) - YouTube
Have you report back to the snap author? 
So I just wanted to share this concept I made;
This is based on what Manjaro did after the backlash they faced over softmaker-office where they just made it a choice in the installer and I wanted to see what other people thought of it.
2 Likes
I very much understand where Clem is coming from on principle, but THIS is absolutely FANTASTIC! Thanks for posting. Nice one, @natalx
1 Like
I haven’t looked at all the issues around this. All I’ll say is I think Mint would be better-off basing on Debian directly. MXLinux does this and I applaud them for it. I much prefer flatpak, partly because they seem to be the more open option and partly because when I run df I don’t get a mess of snap “filesystems” obscuring my view.
My respect goes out to @MichaelTunnell for the best video on the topic by a landslide made 2 days ago. Very comprehensive, a must-see for anyone working out this topic.
TWinL: Linux Mint vs Snaps: Backdoors or Overreacting?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLvWFtGYkvY
5 Likes
@Ulfnic thanks for the link to @MichaelTunnell’s informative video. Although I don’t use Linux Mint myself, I’ve generally thought of their team to be fairly in-touch with their community. Having watched this video I agree Linux Mint are overreacting and taking away choice from their community by making it so hard to install snaps. I still think if they want to become independent of Ubuntu for whatever reason, first-off they should base directly on Debian, secondly, yes, why don’t they have their own infrastructure if they want that much independence and control?
1 Like
The situation appeared to be almost exactly the same in 2018. I don’t know how the bar percentages are derived though so my statements are assuming the intuitive conclusion which could be off.
2018 Archive.org: https://web.archive.org/web/20180511071050/https://snapcraft.io/core
What stands out is since non-Snap users have lost the ability to install Chromium via APT, we’d expect a large rise in Mint users transitioning to Snaps given the vast market share Chromium has.
But instead we’re seeing almost no movement which highlights an almost total resistance to using Snaps by Mint’s non-Snap users. A sentiment i’d argue Linux Mint was anticipating by putting a “safety” on the installation.
A lot of the arguments against Linux Mint’s reaction are not only reasonable but sometimes just plain correct. Though it’s still a fascinating topic because some of it goes a mile deep into the concept of FOSS, ethics of derivative distros, how to think of intuitive user expectations, ect. It’s among a few topics I think deliver way more than the sum of their parts.
I’d agree Linux Mint overreacted. Though this may be the Debian user in me but the “safety” mechanism they deployed is pretty mundane for Linux but obviously more substantial than a UI warning.
Dedian makes you edit your /etc/apt/sources.list with su adding “contrib” and “non-free” parameters to the end of each repo string in order to get software from their repos they don’t approve of but still host. This is far more difficult than Linux Mint’s strategy of requiring a simple file deletion but in both cases it does make you think.
It’s like Debian and Mint both saying… “hey man, we’re cool letting you have this but we want you to take a few extra steps to make sure you understand this goes outside of the ethics you chose us for and we’re just making sure you really know” and in Mint’s case, that step is a single terminal command.
As for Mint re-basing on Debian (them taking their Debian version seriously), it’d make a lot of sense. If they don’t want to move though that’s a whooooole 'nother discussion
2 Likes
RE: Mint basing on Debian directly - … Like LMDE? 
1 Like
Thanks for posting this link. I had NOT seen this video yet. 
Exactly. I say they should just stick with that and abandon the Ubuntu branch if they have such a problem with Canonical. I used the Debian version of Mint a long time ago before switching to straight Debian and I think Mint temporarily discontinued being based on Debian anyway. Personally vanilla Debian has won me over totally
Ubuntu Cinnamon should still be snap-enabled-by-default, right?
Seems like the landscape is large enough to support both versions.
I guess I’m thinking the bottom line is, people develop and work in whatever environment is comfortable for them. If an environment becomes cumbersome, the users switch to something that is, or the MAKE their environment conducive to how they want to use it.
Mint Users (of which I have been one of since Mint 16 when I first heard of linux) seem to be pretty comfortable with Clem’s directions, overall, and chose to stay on the platform for a variety of reasons, right?
1 Like
LMDE is a pretty good project, and I hope they keep it in active development. (No matter how slow that development seems to be at times.) Its nice to have a options.
I prefer the Ubuntu-base currently as it works well for my general usecases. But at some point, I’ll probably find myself on Debian. (BSD confuses me, so likely wouldn’t be an ubuntu-alternative unless things get REALLY bad. 
)
1 Like
I honestly didn’t have an opinion on snaps until recently when I did a fresh Ubuntu 20.04 install. I don’t like their performance on the whole. I also find having two sources (DEB and Snap) clutters up the Software Center. I tried uninstalling them all but then had snapd installed again by something else as a “dependency”. It just smacks of the uninstallable apps I hated in Windows.
Hopefully Canonical will course correct in a future release (they’ve dropped things before) but until then I think I’m done with vanilla Ubuntu. Currently trying out Linux Mint 20 and I’m quite pleased.
My guess is they don’t have the technical resources to do this. Remember that they pull packages straight from Ubuntu. Nothing is holding them back from populating their own repository instead of relying on pulling packages from upstream.
Edit: I didn’t realize how old this thread was.
I know this thread is ancient news now but it should be noted that Mint now provide Chromium themselves, which, I believe was the offending package that started this whole kerfuffle. So I guess everyone’s dreams have come true, at least those who suggested Mint maintain their own version. Here’s the link to the newsletter. Monthly News – October 2020 – The Linux Mint Blog
2 Likes
Thank you for bringing this up. If i’d add a bit more…
TWinL’s coverage on Mint’s Chromium packaging:
Mint built a custom server that’ll automate the packaging process.
According to Alan Pope from Canonical some time ago, “Google releases a new major version of Chromium every six weeks, with typically several minor versions to address security vulnerabilities in between. Every new stable version has to be built for each supported Ubuntu release − 16.04, 18.04, 19.04, and the upcoming 19.10 − and for all supported architectures (amd64, i386, arm, arm64).”
Just based off that comment 4 Ubuntu versions multiplied by 4 architectures would mean compiling and/or testing Chromium 16 times every security update and version release.
Linux Mint on the other hand only has one architecture and may or may not preform tests on the most current version or previous versions making it much easier to do.