9 ms·

Ubuntu tries to make publication easier for app developers

73 points by fluteflute 14y ago

fesja 14y ago
Someone should explain why Linux has been the latest of the big operative systems to have a user-friendly app store, when they were the first to have one with apt-get!! It's a pity, Linux on desktop could have gone way further on market share and popularity. Now, they are doing just a copy (wait for Apple to demand).
- JoshTriplett 14y ago
  > Someone should explain why Linux has been the latest of the big operative systems to have a user-friendly app store, when they were the first to have one with apt-get!! I think you answered your own question. Package management (together with distribution policies to make those packages work together) has solved this problem for Linux already, for all software packageable by distributions, which includes pretty much everything needed to make a usable system. An "app store" just makes it easier to get one-off non-redistributable proprietary apps, which Linux historically hasn't cared much about until other OSes started to, at which point a few Linux distributions started wondering whether catering to proprietary app developers would make the system more popular. (Personally, I'd argue that apps follow platform popularity, not the other way around.)
  - fesja 14y ago
    From my days in Ubuntu... I remember that when I was installing some programs, it was asking me for dependencies. That's not user friendly. The App Store is user-friendly. Do you want that program? Download it! No worries of dependencies. So it doesn't matter if it's proprietary or not. It's a matter of user experience and wanting to make it easy for non-techies. They have improved a lot but it's sad they weren't the first to make that change.
    - glesica 14y ago
      Huh? Longtime Ubuntu user here, I have no idea what you're talking about... Desktop Linux has plenty of problems, no need to invent new ones to complain about. Unless you were installing programs manually you shouldn't need to worry at all about dependencies on Ubuntu (or Debian).
      - gcr 14y ago
        How else does one install programs other than manually? You can't magically wish for Chrome to appear on ubuntu, you have to either use Synaptic, apt-get, or the software center (on recent ubuntii). All of these at least prompt you about dependencies.
        takluyver 14y ago
        'Manually' probably means not using a package manager - either with the configure/make dance, or with a binary installer like Google Earth used for a long time. In those cases, you still need to sort out dependencies manually.
        keithpeter 14y ago
        Yup apt-get install <something-in-repository-or-ppa-you-added> will bring down all the dependencies needed. That's the reason they package stuff against release numbers, so the dependencies are all consistent. dpkg -i <some-random-deb-you-downloaded> may give dependency errors.
        andyking 14y ago
        I get dependency errors on Chrome under Ubuntu 12.04, when I do a dpkg -i google-chrome-stable-whatever.deb. But a quick apt-get -f install after I get those errors sorts it out.
        keithpeter 14y ago
- timClicks 14y ago
  From memory, the Ubuntu Software Centre (under its former name) also pre-dated the App Store and variants.
  - petitmiam 14y ago
    Ubuntu Software Centre has been around since Oct 2009.
    - YokoZar 14y ago
      The former name was Gnome-App-Install, which has basically been around since Ubuntu started in 2004.
- zobzu 14y ago
  It's not about user friendlyness it's about dev friendlyness. in case your didn't know, your favorite appstore also has dependencies. the difference is that they bundle all libraries per OS version. Linux distros bundle per lib version (and thus per package). but that's all up to the dev to fix, not to the user.
- agilord 14y ago
  App store is all of the following: distribution, discovery and promotion. apt-get was really a distribution platform at first, and you could use it for discovery as well. Apple's store is full of promotion, and I haven't seen any Linux solution that even tries to fill that (marketing) gap.
  - dplanella 14y ago
    Then you should check out http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/features/ubuntu-software-centre http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/features/ubuntu-software-centre :)
    - agilord 14y ago
      nice, thanks!
gcr 14y ago
Guys, as the huge yellow warning at the top of the page shows, this is a draft work-in-progress specification. If you don't like it, now is the time to speak up. Jono Bacon (jono AT ubuntu DOT com) is the coordinator. EDIT: Where's the appropriate place to send feedback? Perhaps not to his inbox
- takluyver 14y ago
  According to this post, questions and comments about the spec are invited on the ubuntu-devel mailing list. http://mhall119.com/2012/09/how-the-appdevuploadprocess-was-written/ http://mhall119.com/2012/09/how-the-appdevuploadprocess-was-...
- dplanella 14y ago
  There is a Feedback session at the end of the spec. You can leave your input and questions there, or you can alternatively continue the discussion on the thread at the ubuntu-devel mailing list. Thanks!
zobzu 14y ago
Easy developer deployment? aur.archlinux.org
tylermenezes 14y ago
Their idea of making it better is to require review before the developer is even allowed to upload a build for testing? I can't think of any other app store which requires this sort of thing; it doesn't actually solve any problem. Malicious users can claim to be whoever they want, and I can't imagine unauthorized package ports are a serious problem. If you're trying to make something simple, remove really stupid steps. This is my problem with open source communities, they end out trying to make something theoretically perfect, but realistically unusable. (A better solution: if the reviewer has any doubts they can ask for clarification.)
- mattengi 14y ago
  > Irrespective of whether the app dev uses (1) or (2), they are relying on other people to do work before they can deploy their application. This is less empowering, and for an emerging platform such as Ubuntu, we need to enable app developers to deliver their apps without such delays. > App Review - When the developer submits a new version of their application, it will go through a series of automated checks to verify that it conforms to the Extras packaging and security rules. The developer will be responsible for ensuring the package works effectively. If it doesn’t, the ratings and reviews will surely reflect this. > We should not rely on manual reviews of software before inclusion. Manual reviews have been found to cause a significant bottleneck in the MyApps queue and they won’t scale effectively as we grow and open up Ubuntu to thousands of apps. > The developer will not be able to add any other AppArmor abstractions beyond the ones defined above. All of these options are considered safe, and do not require a manual review before being allowed into the Extras archive. The user will be told about any options from the third group that the application needs, and will be asked to allow or reject its installation.
- takluyver 14y ago
  Well, Apple requires you to enrol in the $99/year 'developer program' to be able to submit applications. The developer check is more like Ubuntu's equivalent of that. The key is that in many cases it will be easy to verify the identity of the developer: find the most active few accounts in the version control log, and email them about it. That takes far less time than auditing code.
- 14y ago

73 points by fluteflute 14y ago

fesja 14y ago

Someone should explain why Linux has been the latest of the big operative systems to have a user-friendly app store, when they were the first to have one with apt-get!! It's a pity, Linux on desktop could have gone way further on market share and popularity. Now, they are doing just a copy (wait for Apple to demand).

JoshTriplett 14y ago
> Someone should explain why Linux has been the latest of the big operative systems to have a user-friendly app store, when they were the first to have one with apt-get!! I think you answered your own question. Package management (together with distribution policies to make those packages work together) has solved this problem for Linux already, for all software packageable by distributions, which includes pretty much everything needed to make a usable system. An "app store" just makes it easier to get one-off non-redistributable proprietary apps, which Linux historically hasn't cared much about until other OSes started to, at which point a few Linux distributions started wondering whether catering to proprietary app developers would make the system more popular. (Personally, I'd argue that apps follow platform popularity, not the other way around.)
- fesja 14y ago
  From my days in Ubuntu... I remember that when I was installing some programs, it was asking me for dependencies. That's not user friendly. The App Store is user-friendly. Do you want that program? Download it! No worries of dependencies. So it doesn't matter if it's proprietary or not. It's a matter of user experience and wanting to make it easy for non-techies. They have improved a lot but it's sad they weren't the first to make that change.
  - glesica 14y ago
    Huh? Longtime Ubuntu user here, I have no idea what you're talking about... Desktop Linux has plenty of problems, no need to invent new ones to complain about. Unless you were installing programs manually you shouldn't need to worry at all about dependencies on Ubuntu (or Debian).
    - gcr 14y ago
      How else does one install programs other than manually? You can't magically wish for Chrome to appear on ubuntu, you have to either use Synaptic, apt-get, or the software center (on recent ubuntii). All of these at least prompt you about dependencies.
      - takluyver 14y ago
        'Manually' probably means not using a package manager - either with the configure/make dance, or with a binary installer like Google Earth used for a long time. In those cases, you still need to sort out dependencies manually.
        keithpeter 14y ago
        Yup apt-get install <something-in-repository-or-ppa-you-added> will bring down all the dependencies needed. That's the reason they package stuff against release numbers, so the dependencies are all consistent. dpkg -i <some-random-deb-you-downloaded> may give dependency errors.
        andyking 14y ago
        I get dependency errors on Chrome under Ubuntu 12.04, when I do a dpkg -i google-chrome-stable-whatever.deb. But a quick apt-get -f install after I get those errors sorts it out.
        keithpeter 14y ago
timClicks 14y ago
From memory, the Ubuntu Software Centre (under its former name) also pre-dated the App Store and variants.
- petitmiam 14y ago
  Ubuntu Software Centre has been around since Oct 2009.
  - YokoZar 14y ago
    The former name was Gnome-App-Install, which has basically been around since Ubuntu started in 2004.
zobzu 14y ago
It's not about user friendlyness it's about dev friendlyness. in case your didn't know, your favorite appstore also has dependencies. the difference is that they bundle all libraries per OS version. Linux distros bundle per lib version (and thus per package). but that's all up to the dev to fix, not to the user.
agilord 14y ago
App store is all of the following: distribution, discovery and promotion. apt-get was really a distribution platform at first, and you could use it for discovery as well. Apple's store is full of promotion, and I haven't seen any Linux solution that even tries to fill that (marketing) gap.
- dplanella 14y ago
  Then you should check out http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/features/ubuntu-software-centre http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/features/ubuntu-software-centre :)
  - agilord 14y ago
    nice, thanks!

gcr 14y ago

Guys, as the huge yellow warning at the top of the page shows, this is a draft work-in-progress specification. If you don't like it, now is the time to speak up. Jono Bacon (jono AT ubuntu DOT com) is the coordinator. EDIT: Where's the appropriate place to send feedback? Perhaps not to his inbox

takluyver 14y ago
According to this post, questions and comments about the spec are invited on the ubuntu-devel mailing list. http://mhall119.com/2012/09/how-the-appdevuploadprocess-was-written/ http://mhall119.com/2012/09/how-the-appdevuploadprocess-was-...
dplanella 14y ago
There is a Feedback session at the end of the spec. You can leave your input and questions there, or you can alternatively continue the discussion on the thread at the ubuntu-devel mailing list. Thanks!

zobzu 14y ago

Easy developer deployment? aur.archlinux.org

tylermenezes 14y ago

Their idea of making it better is to require review before the developer is even allowed to upload a build for testing? I can't think of any other app store which requires this sort of thing; it doesn't actually solve any problem. Malicious users can claim to be whoever they want, and I can't imagine unauthorized package ports are a serious problem. If you're trying to make something simple, remove really stupid steps. This is my problem with open source communities, they end out trying to make something theoretically perfect, but realistically unusable. (A better solution: if the reviewer has any doubts they can ask for clarification.)

mattengi 14y ago
> Irrespective of whether the app dev uses (1) or (2), they are relying on other people to do work before they can deploy their application. This is less empowering, and for an emerging platform such as Ubuntu, we need to enable app developers to deliver their apps without such delays. > App Review - When the developer submits a new version of their application, it will go through a series of automated checks to verify that it conforms to the Extras packaging and security rules. The developer will be responsible for ensuring the package works effectively. If it doesn’t, the ratings and reviews will surely reflect this. > We should not rely on manual reviews of software before inclusion. Manual reviews have been found to cause a significant bottleneck in the MyApps queue and they won’t scale effectively as we grow and open up Ubuntu to thousands of apps. > The developer will not be able to add any other AppArmor abstractions beyond the ones defined above. All of these options are considered safe, and do not require a manual review before being allowed into the Extras archive. The user will be told about any options from the third group that the application needs, and will be asked to allow or reject its installation.
takluyver 14y ago
Well, Apple requires you to enrol in the $99/year 'developer program' to be able to submit applications. The developer check is more like Ubuntu's equivalent of that. The key is that in many cases it will be easy to verify the identity of the developer: find the most active few accounts in the version control log, and email them about it. That takes far less time than auditing code.
14y ago