<div dir="ltr">I think this is step in the right direction make all packages support for the same format. Having same portfile format (.yaml format) for all distros is very nice.<div><br></div><div><a href="http://snapcraft.io/create/">http://snapcraft.io/create/</a> </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">-- AK</div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Ryan Schmidt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ryandesign@macports.org" target="_blank">ryandesign@macports.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:<br>
<br>
> Universal “snap” packages launch on multiple Linux distros<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://insights.ubuntu.com/2016/06/14/universal-snap-packages-launch-on-multiple-linux-distros/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://insights.ubuntu.com/2016/06/14/universal-snap-packages-launch-on-multiple-linux-distros/</a><br>
><br>
> Even OpenWRT on the list. Why not join?<br>
<br>
</span>Do I understand correctly that you are suggesting that MacPorts should change its binary package format from what it currently uses to this "snap" package format? If so, what would be the advantage to MacPorts to doing so?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>