Not that it's bad. For me, it's actually very useful, I just find it mildly amusing that an app for managing AppImages is packaged as a Flatpak, despite the two formats being widely known as competitors*.
* Okay, most people (including me) would say that the two formats are for different use cases and aren't directly competitors, but for the eyes of a lot of AppImage purists and Flatpak critics, they are.
What's off? It's an app for managing appimages that is hosted on flathub. Just because it is a flatpak does not mean it can't manage appimages
edit: a word
Speaking of that app, I have been using it for some of my programs that are only available as an AppImage for sometime now and I can confirm it works really great.
Flathub link in case anybody's interested
OK well I'm not sure where the AppImage "purists" and Flatpak "critics" are but I've not really encountered them.
How is it compared to AppImageLauncher? That's what I've been using for a few things that only ship AppImage.
I bet the dev gets a lot of angry comments over that, a absolute hero!
Everytime they add a feature to AppImage, they just keep trying to recreate flatpak but worse.
