Maybe someone should do that, then. I'd be onboard with it. Then I could reference it by a better name and feel more OK with recommending it.
The problem is, how many large Linux distros will accept a new package into their package managers that is essentially the exact same thing as an existing package, just with a different name and logo assets? For this to be truly successful, it has to be as easy as `apt-get install gpaint` (insert better name here).
I'm not completely familiar but I get the sense that building a snap package isn't that much of a hurdle if there's such a big need for a renamed fork.
I haven't had great experiences with Snap packages, to be honest. And the fact that they use their own sandboxed filesystem is really inconvenient for an image editing app.
I probably won't be installing any more Snap packages.
Ok...then flatpak or appimage...there's a clear omnipresent issue here where people argue over petty issues that fragment and polarize the software ecosystem and it's only worse that resources are heavily constrained and voluntary. I don't mean this to discount your concern, but you're making a strong ask from a community that's based completely on loosely-coordinated voluntary efforts. If you want change - advocacy is not enough and frankly counterproductive. Start solving your problem and paying it forward to the people that you think will benefit.
The problem is, how many large Linux distros will accept a new package into their package managers that is essentially the exact same thing as an existing package, just with a different name and logo assets? For this to be truly successful, it has to be as easy as `apt-get install gpaint` (insert better name here).