Hey @juanghiri
I think you misunderstood the @store-requests-bot message. It just said that your request was added to the review queue for tracking purposes, but it was never granted.
Regarding the reasoning:
1. **Arbitrary filesystem access for project indexing** - The core functionality is indexing user codebases located anywhere on the filesystem. Users run `codeseeker init` in any project directory to build a knowledge graph of their code. This cannot be limited to home or removable-media.
I think home and removable-media will suffice most use cases. Please note that access to arbitrary files on the system due to developer/user inertia is explicitly listed as unsupported in Process for reviewing classic confinement snaps
2 **IDE configuration file writes** - Must write MCP server configuration to IDE-specific paths: - `~/.vscode/mcp.json` (VS Code / Claude Code) - `~/.cursor/mcp.json` (Cursor) - `~/.config/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json` (Claude Desktop) - `~/.windsurf/mcp.json` (Windsurf)
It can be done via personal-files.
3. **MCP server stdio protocol** - Runs as a child process spawned by IDEs via stdio-based JSON-RPC. This requires unrestricted IPC communication that strict confinement cannot provide.
I’m not familiar with this, so I cannot give any recommendation here.
4. **Node.js and npm ecosystem access** - Requires access to globally installed npm packages and the ability to execute node binaries in the host environment.
You should ship everything needed in your snap instead.
In addition, classic confinement is a sensitive matter and it is reserved for mature, well-known applications published by mature, well-known entities. As of today, I believe that codeseeker doesn’t meet this criteria because of the following reasons:
-
The project seems to be very fresh, according to the upstream repository
-
The projects seems to have little/none community around according to upstream repository (contributors, issues, PRs, etc.)
-
I could not find evidences that the project has a strong enough user base currently
Considering all these factors, I think codeseeker should not get classic confinement as of now.
Thanks