The instructions include installing Spotify as snaps, but there is no description in the QD documentation, nor in the current page, about what snaps and snapcraft are. This can be confusing to new users who have just been introduced to flatpaks.
If any one has time, and would like to go over and discuss how this Doc can be improved upon or has issue with it’s current state, I am all ears. I am assigned to it and would like to hear about how we can better handle these types of issues more quickly, so this is also a way for me to gauge community interaction and points for and against.
Also if @mblasko Would like to add more here, I’d love to hear it !
I would add the removal of Snap and it’s installation from the Doc itself, as Flatpak and RPM packages are more integrated to the Fedora Environment,
Snaps should imo not be in the scope of documentation since it is not one of the officially supported installation methods. The same would apply to something like Homebrew.
Unrelated to this topic, but i noticed a few other articles in that category that i feel don’t really belong in official documentation, an example would be this one:
Installing multiple desktop environments is technically possible but would in general not be advisable for various reasons. So when including it in official docs, new users might think it’s an officially recommended practice.
Given that Spotify is available also as Flatpak, I would remove the reference to snaps on “Installing Spotify on Fedora” page, at least as long there is no reference to snaps in general, but probably anyhow.
There is a different discussion if it would make sense to create a dedicated page with Alternate installations methods / app packaging (snaps, AppImages etc). This is a bigger task though. I think it is better for new users to find out about them from the official Fedora Docs page, given that:
There was a page on different package managers and compiling from source and so on, but it’s just too vast to write up and too difficult to keep up to date. I’m also not sure if this fits in with quick docs, since it’s not a quick doc
I’d say the quick docs should include information that takes the easiest route(s) to install stuff. It’s not meant to be exhaustive documentation on all the ways people can install stuff.
So, I’d say we limit them to rpm packages and flatpaks as much as possible. If neither of these are available, then one can look at other “packagers”.
Basically, I agree with the proposal. But I would not necessarily remove the sections about Snap but put it after RPM/Fusion and flatpak as an alternative unsupported Installation method. If someone already uses Snap for some reason, the section might be helpful.
Thank you for bringing this up, and if you could. . . Please join Pagure and place an issue against this Doc so we can at the very least review it and have dialogue around this.
Excellent points !
Hey there
Thanks for chiming in on this topic. I wanted to open the discussion up and see who/what interest it peaks. To your remark, I agree that some times we lose scope of what a Quick Doc, Wiki, Documentation actually is. It’s easy to fall into a though pattern and once yu are done no longer fit the intended audience.
I think Mike’s point is valid, as it would require the added page or information pertinent to the topic.
I think some good points were made, let’s see if we get some more feedback and insight.
I opened this thread in Project Discussion as I did not see a direct home for this type of dialogue on the forums.
Engagement so far seems pretty good, but I would genuinely like to see more input. Acknowledgment is great, and sufficient. I think an aside as Olivier has done, is also valuable. That Doc was not on my radar at all, but now has visibility so thanks for that !
I would like to point out that the Spotify snap is maintained by Spotify engineers. Even if snap is not a preferred package format for Fedora, it still makes sense to include it as it comes from the app’s developers.
