Super-productivity: [Feature] Flatpak package

[patriziobruno]

As a multiple-distribution user, I'd like to have the application packaged using Flatpak, to leverage its sandboxing features.

[johannesjo]

Hey there! Unfortunately flatpak support is not a priority at the moment. To be honest, I wouldn't even know where to publish them. But I gladly accept Pull Requests !

Maybe the implementation is straightforward. Check this for example https://www.npmjs.com/package/electron-installer-flatpak. Ideally it also would be built automatically on travis.

[patriziobruno]

@johannesjo, thanks for the quick reply. The Flatpak could be easily published on super-productivity.com or you can ask to for it to be hosted on flathub.org
I'll have a look to a possible solution and if I can come up with something useful I'll send you a PR.

[johannesjo]

Would have been too easy ;)

Did you mean to use electron-packager instead of electron builder?

sh: 1: electron-packager: not found
npm ERR! file sh
npm ERR! code ELIFECYCLE
npm ERR! errno ENOENT
npm ERR! syscall spawn
npm ERR! [email protected] build: `gulp build && electron-packager . superProductivity --platform linux --arch x64 --out dist/`
npm ERR! spawn ENOENT
npm ERR! 
npm ERR! Failed at the [email protected] build script.
npm ERR! This is probably not a problem with npm. There is likely additional logging output above.
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR!     /home/travis/.npm/_logs/2017-11-30T00_30_03_419Z-debug.log

See: https://travis-ci.org/johannesjo/super-productivity/jobs/309259690

[patriziobruno]

Yes I wanted to use electron-packager, rather than electron-builder, because the latter doesn't support flatpaks. I'm fixing the issue, is it alright if I push a new PR, once I'm done?

[johannesjo]

Sounds great! :)

Patrizio Bruno [e-mail] schrieb am Do., 30. Nov. 2017 um
12:05 Uhr:

Yes I wanted to use electron-packager, rather than electron-builder,
because the latter doesn't support flatpaks. I'm fixing the issue, is it
alright if I push a new PR, once I'm done?

—
You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.

Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/johannesjo/super-productivity/issues/25#issuecomment-348156744,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABY4iZyt-V09o95exOgGvZx66-GWUwwYks5s7owHgaJpZM4QlryO
.

[johannesjo]

Closing this due to inactivity. Feel free to reopen!

[kolya-ay]

Actually it would be cool to have such an option. Simply because many distribution will never include electorn (and electron based apps) as a packages and not everyone wants to use both flatpak and (basically ubuntu-specific) snap. I hope, I'm not alone;) However it seems that it's worth to wait till mainstream issue will be resolved

[kaushalyap]

@patriziobruno @johannesjo Any progress with this?

Just publish to Flathub. https://github.com/flathub/flathub/wiki/App-Submission#how-to-submit-an-app

[johannesjo]

@kaushalyap thanks for the input! Please upvote the original issue, if you like to see this happening. Maintaining another deployment target requires – speaking from experience – a lot of time. For this reason, I'll only implement support (myself) when there is a huge demand for it as efforts are probably better focussed elsewhere if only a couple of people profit from this.

[kd2flz]

I upvoted this issue because I would love to see a flatpak implementation. I am using the snap and it works fine. However, flatpak is my preferred package installation method.

[johannesjo]

Btw. here is a link to the electron builder issue: https://github.com/electron-userland/electron-builder/issues/512

If that get's implemented this should become trivially easy (well maybe not the publishing part, but the flatpak creation hopefully will be).