[Interest] Official linuxdeployqt ?
vperetokin at hey.com
Tue Aug 9 08:03:25 CEST 2022
Just to correct some biases here, in my opinion as a software publisher
AppImage is still the simplest way for a user to run your app.
To get Mudlet (a FOSS text games client) all you need to do is go to
https://www.mudlet.org/download, download the .tar, right-click to
extract it and double-click to run.
It really is that simple; experienced and unexperienced users alike
across many different Linux distributions make it work.
Try to replicate that with snap or flatpak - you won't be able to
without messing in the terminal or relying on distro-specific
distribution channels. Nothing beats AppImage for a truly distro
agnostic image distribution format, and I'm speaking from having used it
for years to distribute my software.
On August 8, 2022, Vadim Peretokin via Interest <interest at qt-
> On 8/8/22 16:09, Jörg Bornemann wrote:
> > Mitch already pointed you to QTBUG-74940. The biggest question
> > regarding a linuxdeployqt is: what exactly is the deployment format
> > going to be? There's no standard way of deploying Linux
> > There are many.
> > The community contributions create AppImage packages. That seems
> > be a reasonable choice. Other opinions?
> Like Roland said, it has to be Flatpak. I haven't seen anyone talking
> about AppImage in years, and Snap is too Ubuntu-specific.
> windeployqt doesn't package anything though, so should linuxdeployqt?
> macdeployqt only sort of does, with its dmg support.
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Interest