Update check on Ubuntu points to Appimage instead of deb file

[nazar-pc]

I've just checked updates and clicked Download button.
I was directed to download cerebro-0.2.6-x86_64.AppImage file, while expectation is to download cerebro_0.2.6_amd64.deb (current version 0.2.5 is installed from deb file).
Is this something that might be improved?

[KELiON]

@nazar-pc thanks for this issue! Actually, it is just leak of knowledge from my side :D

Can you explain what is the difference between .AppImage and .deb? When I tested the app on Ubuntu 16 I used .AppImage and it used to work.

[nazar-pc]

Frankly speaking, I have no idea what .AppImage is, never used it:) .deb is what standard package manager uses on Debian-based OSs, don't see the point of trying anything else if .deb package is available.

[maximbaz]

Ubuntu is moving away from .deb though, the future standard will be snap packages. Here's why. Internally .deb files are still used as I understand, but the end-users will be using snaps.

Snaps / Flatpack / AppImage are three different formats with a very similar purpose, to improve packaging and distribution of applications. Differences are listed for example here.

How to choose today:

• If the upgrade process is manual, use AppImage as it is simpler and independent of Linux distro.
• If a native integration with OS package manager is desired (so that updates are coming automatically), the format depends on the OS. For Ubuntu, that could only be snaps or .deb.

[KELiON]

@maximbaz so, snap is now supported only by Ubuntu, not by other distributions, isn't it? Does it make sense now to add snap as another option for Cerebro releases? electron-builder already supports it.

@nazar-pc what do you think about it after @maximbaz comment? Is it ok to use .AppImage as default Linux format or you'd like to use deb?

[nazar-pc]

I'll use .deb for now, all of my packages are in this format, nor going to change anything just for one app.

Snap is kind of interesting and supported not only in Ubuntu, but it is centralized, which is why many people leaning towards Flatpack, which has better cross-distro support and comparable features to Snap, while not being so centralized.

[maximbaz]

snaps are also supported other distros, I think devs want them to be as universal as AppImage. However this particular format is built by Ubuntu folks, and so they naturally target Ubuntu first. In reality I haven't heard anyone outside of Ubuntu using snaps (yet?).

I'd say ideally you should provide all 4, Snaps / Flatpack / AppImage / deb, plus sources. With these four you would literally cover almost everyone's needs, and the rest will gladly build from sources. Electron-builder doesn't support Flatpack yet though.

When choosing a default, consider what benefits you could achieve by that. In my mind, you definitely want to ensure that as many people as possible use the latest version, and thus do not experience and do not report bugs that have already been fixed. This means prioritizing the formats that provides either fully automatic updates or native integration with OS package manager. But that also means investing time to investigate how exactly to provide this (for .deb you would need to provide PPA, for others I imagine there's something else to configure).

[luisdavim]

+1 for snap package and Snaps are supported by Electron-builder.

[gluons]

.AppImage is similar to Windows portable .exe, right?
Can .AppImage access root permission?
I currently use .deb. I've never used .AppImage but I'll try.

[patilswapnilv]

I think a doc with instructions on the downloads page to install using the terminal directly would be more helpful. I downloaded the AppImage from the website earlier and I had no idea what I should do with it. Later I tried .deb it was installed but does not work properly. Any suggestions?

[gluons]

@patilswapnilv Just set Appimage as executable. Then double click to run the app. Done 😊