Talk:AppImage

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)

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)
 * IMHO: do mention, do not compare. --logixoul 11:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * .cmg is similar to .dmg --148.81.137.4 00:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

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)

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

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)

External links modified
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.

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

Should klik and PortableLinuxApps be included as synonyms?
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)

Changing the redirect
There is a discussion at Talk:Klik (disambiguation) on whether Klik should redirect here (as Klik (packaging method) already does.) Please feel free to add your input. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:58, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Mention the main repo for AppImages
https://appimage.github.io/apps/ --Tuxayo (talk) 19:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Can we have multiple repos?
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)

Intro length seems fine now
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)