Technically you shouldn't, but some people don't consider this a loss of credibility as a whole.
The moment Ubuntu started deceptively poisoning their repo with pre-packaged fixup scripts that would violate security policy by fixing/re-enable snap if it was disabled, and installed the related snap packages (without prompts) instead, was the moment I stopped using Ubuntu for anything professional or production grade.
The package manager is apt, visibility is through apt. If I wanted a snap package, I'd use snap to install it. If you use apt-get upgrade, you shouldn't have to worry about third-party idiocy violating security policy without disclosure or notice and automatically fixing disabled services, and then installing the snap packages.
We don't use snap for a reason, it is unnecessary and broad attack surface that is unneeded.
The moment Ubuntu started deceptively poisoning their repo with pre-packaged fixup scripts that would violate security policy by fixing/re-enable snap if it was disabled, and installed the related snap packages (without prompts) instead, was the moment I stopped using Ubuntu for anything professional or production grade.
The package manager is apt, visibility is through apt. If I wanted a snap package, I'd use snap to install it. If you use apt-get upgrade, you shouldn't have to worry about third-party idiocy violating security policy without disclosure or notice and automatically fixing disabled services, and then installing the snap packages.
We don't use snap for a reason, it is unnecessary and broad attack surface that is unneeded.