I'd say that part of the problem is that there is no "right" way to develop for Linux. There's a multitude of choices available at every turn when developing software for Linux, and while this is its strength, it's also its weakness. On Windows and especially OS X there are established "right ways" that can easily be deferred to.
Trying to provide support for Linux software could also potentially be nightmarish given the innumerable factors at play. There's no end to the number of ways any given Linux box may be set up.
Can you give an example of what the 'multitude of choices' is please?
I hear this often about Linux and don't really understand what people mean. Interested to hear someone else's perspective.
From my perspective, there are options in the Linux world but a pretty clear beaten path of common choices. The one choice you have to make is the toolkit - QT or GTK+ - but that seems like it. In terms of things like sessions, caching all the distributions follow the same standard (e.g freedesktop.org)
The problem with Electron (and other Chromium/WebKit wrappers) is that they produce apps that are a lot heavier than those built with native UI toolkits (Cocoa, Qt, GTK+, etc). That might be ok for some types of apps, but I wouldn’t want a git client that requires resources on the order of a Chrome tab (300MB+ memory and high CPU usage).
Trying to provide support for Linux software could also potentially be nightmarish given the innumerable factors at play. There's no end to the number of ways any given Linux box may be set up.