Talk:AppImage

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Computing: Software Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance). Linux Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. C/C++ This article is within the scope of WikiProject C/C++, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of C and C++ topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.C/C++Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++Template:WikiProject C/C++C/C++ articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. Technology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles Software: Computing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

What are the drawbacks? If there were none we'd see all our software done just this way. I understand the attraction of the approach, but they come with drawbacks by their very nature: multiple versions of libraries, etc. 8 klik limit is mentioned, what else? I feel this should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.83.142 (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should we need to mention/compare klik with a Mac OS X or NeXT package ? Since i think they use a similar idea (self-contained package). -- bact' 213.61.59.235 11:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO: do mention, do not compare. --logixoul 11:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

.dmg --148.81.137.4 00:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

I have repaired the lowercase template to replace the title with "klik (packaging)" on Java-enabled browsers. The alternative title must exactly match the page title, except for the capital letter, for the template to work. Either that, or it didn't work before because the page "Klik" already exists. — Swpb ^{talk contribs} 15:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems klik2 is now called portablelinuxapps.org. The old klik wabsite has dissappeared. 85.76.98.51 (talk) 20:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

portablelinuxapps.org now redirects to http://appimage.org/ . The name PortableLinuxApps seems not to be used any more, they speak about AppImages instead. 85.23.199.144 (talk) 19:31, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on AppImage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1910211845236337938%23
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070626012138/http://klik.atekon.de/ to http://klik.atekon.de/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://klik.atekon.de/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:09, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, from reading this article is seems like klik and PortageLinuxApps are so distinct from the present format known as AppImage that maybe we should not mention them as earlier names in the lead, but rather as predecessors. Frankly if we had enough information to create reasonably sized separate articles I'd argue they'd belong in separate articles. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 08:21, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at

https://appimage.github.io/apps/ --Tuxayo (talk) 19:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the case for Snap.

That might be the case for AppImage, if this could be confirmed, it would be worth mentioning. Since when comparing AppImage to traditional repos or with Snap or Flatpak it's an important question.

maybe a source (though primary): https://github.com/AppImage/AppImageKit/wiki/Similar-projects#application-distribution

--Tuxayo (talk) 20:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The "Lead too short" template was added in October 2009, when the lead was indeed a very short line about klik (as it was called back then). A lot has improved since then and I would say the current lead seems sufficient. So I took the liberty of removing the template. --MichielN (talk) 13:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]