The challenge is that a) we don't really want to (can't afford to, etc) maintain a forked package for everything which comes in snaps and b) snaps are really, really, much better for publishing and maintaining certain classes of application, in particular complex ones with hundreds of dependencies and a massive surface area, like a web browser. And users want web browsers, so the default is to include snaps.

In general, you can opt of snaps entirely and `apt-get remove snapd`, but you'll miss out on potentially critical components that are only available via snaps.

If there are ever any 'potentially critical components ... only available via snaps', many of us will bail to distros that don't have that weakness.

I don't use, but see the advantages of such packaging. But auto-updating software (FOSS or blob) brings-in it's own barrel of concerns. In the event of something 'critical', a -message- alerting the user ... who can then research and decide ... is far preferable.

I've not used Ubuntu but was about to search for a distro to put on a rebuild machine... I was considering Ubuntu up until I heard about this.

As a former Gentoo user, this whole Snap concept is a huge deal-breaker. I wouldn't consider Ubuntu for anything other than some thin-client/smart terminal/kiosk usage, and I'd still be wary of what gets pushed and what sort of potential holes might get opened.

> but you'll miss out on potentially critical components that are only available via snaps

REALLY shitty move.

> I wouldn't consider Ubuntu for anything other than some thin-client/smart terminal/kiosk usage

Until the snap maintainer of Qt decides to upgrade you out of version compliance with your compositor and... Well, hope your kiosk doesn't do anything critical...

You mention that snaps are really well suited for installing and updating large surface applications like web browsers. Then you say that by removing snapd you will opt out of critical components. If Canonical is using snaps for large third party applications so their maintainers can push updates without user intervention, why would it EVER use snaps for critical components? Like, wtf is that? If something is critical to my system, I need to decide when it is modified. The maintainers can't possibly know when that's okay. Using snaps for anything important is a serious regression.

I'd argue you can't just "apt-get remove snapd", when you push transitional apt packages that depends on snapd.

I understand the argument with browsers, but that does not justify the default on ubuntu-server. LXD being Snap-only really feels like force-feeding Snap.

You could give this a try combined with something like the ungoogled-chromium PPA:

    sudo apt-get autoremove snapd
    sudo apt-mark hold snapd

(I use apt-mark and some custom scripting to defer nVidia driver updates until system boot to ensure that they don't yank libGL function out from under me at an inopportune time.)

If it doesn't work sufficiently well when I'm ready to upgrade from 16.04 LTS, then I'm switching to Debian. (I'd intended to be on 18.04 LTS by now, but life doesn't always cooperate and I haven't found time to risk a day or two of squashing upgrade-induced bugs)