If upstream code presumes things will work that dont in snap (e.g. accesses /tmp or /etc) the snap maintainer has to rewrite that code and maintain a fork. Pointless work. Packaging for .deb is a no-brainer.

>Linux needs an app delivery format Yeah, it's incredible that it has managed to survive for so long without one.

It's Snap that drove me to Arch, so it did me a huge favour. Seeing things like GNOME as a snap and other 'core' products wasn't something I was comfortable with. Personally, I prefer flatpaks as a packaging format when compared to snap and appimage. I agree that Linux needs an app delivery format, but snap's current implementation isn't it.

Progress is made of compromises, this implies that we have to consider not only disadvantages, but also the advantages. Advantages do very clearly outweigh disadvantages. This doesn’t mean it perfect, or that work shouldn’t continue to minimize and reduce the disadvantages, but just considering disadvantages is not the correct way.

but everything they were doing started to make sense

I couldn't land on how I wanted to box primitives. Should I use a getter/setter, or function form like Knockout, or explicit get/set like MobX? These were all ugly.

Yet there is a growing recognition that provisions must also be made for the data-analysis software that supports the conclusions.