3 ms·
Ok, so as noted, the backend canonical servers are for easy of use. It's possible to use another service if one was inclined. Still don't see what's specific ab
by _joel 10y ago
Ok, so as noted, the backend canonical servers are for easy of use. It's possible to use another service if one was inclined. Still don't see what's specific about vendor lockin. If you couldn't run your own service and change the default provider, then I could agree that it's vendor lock-in but it needs (currently) a ubuntu or docker to build the snaps. I still don't class that as vendor lock-in. It's just missing effort in terms of multi-distro support.
Saying it's vendor lock-in throws up fairly draconian images in my head and that's far from the case.
- jhasse 10y agoWell, if one really wanted to use a different store, they'd have to change hard-coded URLs in snapd's source code (for example `snap login`), set up all the stuff (which was only tested on Ubuntu) and then ship these new tools. I doubt that Canonical would let you keep the "snap" name by then ...
- mhall119 10y agoSomebody who wants to setup their own store can send a pull request making the changes they need to snapd to make it easier to configure. Right now it's unclear if a "different store" would use the same data and protocol or would want to do something entirely different. In the end it's just a means of getting a .snap downloaded, so it can be as similar or different as the implementer wants.