[Cin] What about flapak?

[Phyllis Smith]

Hi, W.P,
As always good to know you are still "lurking" out there!

We absolutely wish to also make a FlatPak version and that is why the
subdirectory was named "images" so that it would be meaningful to have both
the AppImage and FlatPak there. BUT, what we need is someone versatile in
setting up an initial FlatPak for Cinelerra-GG to help get that going --
once set up, I should be able to use it as needed. We were indeed lucky for
MatN to put in the time to get AppImage going. Hoping for someone to
provide the same for FlatPak -- it just seems from what I have read to be
less obvious.

On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 4:32 PM W P via Cin <cin at lists.cinelerra-gg.org>
wrote:

> First of all thank you MatN (as from what I understood you were the person
> who allowed appimage to be built),
>
> I followed the recent switch to appimage and I understand it makes sense
> as there is no need for different builds.
>
> Just one thought, why appimage and not flatpak?
>
> I prefer flatpak but my personal preference doesn't matter,
>
> I think the only cons of flatpak compared to appimage is the larger size
> (in today's world it should not be an issue but I realized that for many
> good internet is not a thing yet).
>
> However I would like to point out which IMHO is the best advantage of
> flatpak over appimage, flathub, the repo where many, popular FLOSS
> softwares are present. I remember reading appimage has something similar
> but I think it is nowhere near as popular as flathub. A search for 'video
> editor' shows many cinelerra 'competitors' but no cinelerra :/
>
> https://flathub.org/apps/search/video%20editor
>
> Are there plans in the future to offer a flatpak of cinelerra as well?
> --
> Cin mailing list
> Cin at lists.cinelerra-gg.org
> https://lists.cinelerra-gg.org/mailman/listinfo/cin
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cinelerra-gg.org/pipermail/cin/attachments/20210423/bf8f6137/attachment.htm>