arch2appimage VS OBS-Studio-appimage

Arch2AppImage is useless, just like my Arch-Deployer (Arch2AppImage is inspired by my project, see it's README), I've also created an "issue" on its repository to explain why I've abandoned it, see https://github.com/hanzala123/arch2appimage/issues/25 ).

I'm a creator of AppImage packages, the basis always used (and recommended) is to create them based on old distributions for compatibility reasons. With this solution I want to try to break that rule. Both my Arch-deployer and the better known arch2appimage failed at this (and were archived as a result).

less than two years ago I published a bash script that can that downloads a package from the Arch repository or from ChaoticAUR with all its dependences, and this was a big success for me on this community and on github. Later someone else, inspired by this project, have developed its own tool with a better code and easier to use (DT on YouTube did also a review on it, here). Everithing is great, I'm glad about all this, but... I stopped work on my repo more than 1 year ago (about december 2021) for a reason, the same that I think the developer of arch2appimage have understand later (and I said it into an issue, here), that's why its project have no more commits since 9 months. Arch-based AppImages are not a good idea, here are two reasons:

If you are in Arch, arch2appimage can easily make packages from Chaotic AUR.

OBS Studio https://github.com/ivan-hc/OBS-Studio-appimage from 200 to 167

Visit https://github.com/ivan-hc/ArchImage for more!

In my experience with Flatpak, when upgrading a runtime (from Nvidia) to the next version, used by the same app (WINE), I ended up with two runtimes and not even the "uninstall –unused" option had removed it , I did it manually later (and it's not very intuitive). Also, aside from "du", most disk space measurement tools still identify an inordinate amount of space, and even if you show me that article (which is one of many I've already read about it) this does not changes my experience with this format, because "ostree" is not a very intuitive system even for those who, like me, are used to LSB (Linus Standard Base) standards. I had to intervene on a malfunction of a single app I wouldn't be able to make my changes, while on a regular package it is still possible to do it... and for AppImages it is even more so. I once reported a problem to qBittorrent maintainers on flathub (this), never got a response. On the contrary, movements on the repository have made them (I'm telling you about when qBittorrent was switching from qt5 to qt6), and it was correcting their file and then returning it to the previous version. I don't know how apps work on runtimes, but this attitude (which I've seen in real time) seemed to me to be that of people who didn't even know what they were doing. With AppImage at least I have the security of knowing what's inside. Taking OBS again as an example, in the past whoever built this app in AppImages obtained packages ranging from 70 to 150 MB of space (always compressed), while I use other systems to package my AppImages at most and managed to bring it to 250 MB with deb packages (and it still doesn't work, some environment variables that I didn't include in the AppRun... you can see it here), not to mention the fact that many developer's platforms cut out the workspaces that we used to build on (i.e., for backwards compatibility issues we use usually the oldest Ubuntu LTS release still supported). I'm trying to go differently than the AppImage constructors of the past, and this method looks promising.