dpkg compatibility

[Mark Shuttleworth]

On 11/11/15 18:01, Michael Pozhidaev wrote:
> What about backward compatibility with dpkg? Does Snappy imply that all
> software which the maintainers have packaged in debs becomes obsolete?
> With this question I'm worrying more about packaging and maintaining
> procedures, rather than installation and deployment.

It's a great question; we want to make it easy to include deb content in
your snap, and in many cases that is achievable, but it's also important
to make it really easy to include content from outside the deb packaged
universe.

We observed over the years that there was lots of content and code that
did not fit easily into the deb packaging system, that's why upstreams
often recommend that you use systems like pip rather than deb packages
of Python libraries. Snapcraft essentially lets you use pip, npm, and
the equivalents from Java and other languages, very easily. We've also
noticed that there is loads of software on Launchpad and Github which is
moving too fast to meaningfully package it as debs and give it a stable
9 year support cycle. That stuff all goes very nicely into snaps.

So in summary, ideally you can reuse any deb content you like in your
snap, and add to that anything else from any source you like with just a
few lines of declarative snapcraft magic.

If you are currently packaging stuff as debs then by all means continue
to do so. If snaps would be easier and more comfortable for you, then
switch to pure snaps.

Mark