Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "AppImage" in Turkish language version.
Last modified:
I have seen this first hand with the other project I'm involved with, which is my dive log app. We make binaries for Windows and OSX, we basically don't make binaries for Linux. Why? Because making binaries for Linux desktop applications is a major fucking pain in the ass.
Interestingly, OpenShot is distributed via appimage. That means they provide a single binary that can be run on just about any modern Linux distribution. I personally tested this out on openSUSE Tumbleweed with great success—but it should run just as easily on Debian, Fedora or others. I love this approach to distributing software directly from the developers.
I finally got around to play with the "AppImage" version of +Subsurface, and it really does seem to "just work".
I, as the app maintainer, don't want my app bundled in a distribution anymore. Way to much pain for absolutely zero gain. Whenever I get a bug report my first question is "oh, which version of which distribution? which version of which library? What set of insane patches were applied to those libraries?". No, Windows and Mac get this right. I control the libraries my app runs against. [...] With an AppImage I can give them just that. Something that runs on their computer.
The AppImage format has been created with specific objectives in mind: Be Simple [...], Maintain binary compatibility [...], Be distribution-agnostic [...], Remove the need for installation [...], Allow to put apps anywhere [...], Do not require recompilation [...], Keep base operating system untouched [...], Do not require root [...]
The AppImage format has been created with specific objectives in mind: Be Simple [...], Maintain binary compatibility [...], Be distribution-agnostic [...], Remove the need for installation [...], Allow to put apps anywhere [...], Do not require recompilation [...], Keep base operating system untouched [...], Do not require root [...]
I have seen this first hand with the other project I'm involved with, which is my dive log app. We make binaries for Windows and OSX, we basically don't make binaries for Linux. Why? Because making binaries for Linux desktop applications is a major fucking pain in the ass.
I finally got around to play with the "AppImage" version of +Subsurface, and it really does seem to "just work".
I, as the app maintainer, don't want my app bundled in a distribution anymore. Way to much pain for absolutely zero gain. Whenever I get a bug report my first question is "oh, which version of which distribution? which version of which library? What set of insane patches were applied to those libraries?". No, Windows and Mac get this right. I control the libraries my app runs against. [...] With an AppImage I can give them just that. Something that runs on their computer.
Interestingly, OpenShot is distributed via appimage. That means they provide a single binary that can be run on just about any modern Linux distribution. I personally tested this out on openSUSE Tumbleweed with great success—but it should run just as easily on Debian, Fedora or others. I love this approach to distributing software directly from the developers.
