Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#31

Post by nani8ot »

neilv wrote: post #25

Latest version in F-Droid of Calendar is dated 2023-10-08. I haven't checked whether that version exfiltrates user's data. I'd be more concerned about any subsequent versions. https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.simplemobiletools.calend...

It's highly unlikely that any F-Droid versions are going to be released by the ad-ware company. This company doesn't publish code as open source, and tibbi (original creator of SMT) is of the opinion that relicensing the code isn't a big deal because they wrote almost all of it.

https://github.com/SimpleMobileTools/General-Discussion/issu...

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#32

Post by NoboruWataya »

I was sad to see this as a long-time used of SMT. Kudos to Naveen for taking the initiative in forking. I hope it doesn't turn out to be too much work for him (+ other contributors who help out). I imagine it's a big endeavour trying to fork all of the apps.

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#33

Post by CorrectHorseBat »

vanous wrote: post #10
p4bl0 wrote: post #6

I didn't know SMT had been lost to an adware company… That's really sad. I'm a big time user of most of the apps in this project! Many of them are very good Android apps even compared to paid alternatives. I'm especially pissed by this move because I used this project quite a lot in the free software development course that I teach. Many students want to gain experience in mobile development, and helping them make th…

Automatic switch is not possible due to different signatures, which is in fact a good thing. If the Fossify project keeps it running, contribution of your students is not lost at all.

Doesn't F-Droid sign with their key instead of the developers key? (More like the Linux distribution model)

At least I thought that was the reason Signal doesn't like F-Droid, but now we see how this can actually be better. It's a matter of who you trust more.

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#34

Post by neilv »

nani8ot wrote: post #31
neilv wrote: post #25

Latest version in F-Droid of Calendar is dated 2023-10-08. I haven't checked whether that version exfiltrates user's data. I'd be more concerned about any subsequent versions. https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.simplemobiletools.calend...

It's highly unlikely that any F-Droid versions are going to be released by the ad-ware company. This company doesn't publish code as open source, and tibbi (original creator of SMT) is of the opinion that relicensing the code isn't a big deal because they wrote almost all of it. https://github.com/SimpleMobileTools/General-Discussion/issu...

Unless the predatory-inclined buyer decided to also try to harvest some value of the open source user base, given the unusual situation of these particular acquired apps being open source?

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#35

Post by rakoo »

CorrectHorseBat wrote: post #33
vanous wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automatic switch is not possible due to different signatures, which is in fact a good thing. If the Fossify project keeps it running, contribution of your students is not lost at all.

Doesn't F-Droid sign with their key instead of the developers key? (More like the Linux distribution model) At least I thought that was the reason Signal doesn't like F-Droid, but now we see how this can actually be better. It's a matter of who you trust more.

Yes, but the initial content is signed by the developers key. In fact it's a frequent issue because developers lose, misplace or forget their keys and some manual intervention has to be made (that's where you appreciate a process where humans can talk to each other, something that would be impossible with a store the size of any other commercial store)

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#36

Post by albert180 »

neilv wrote: post #34
nani8ot wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's highly unlikely that any F-Droid versions are going to be released by the ad-ware company. This company doesn't publish code as open source, and tibbi (original creator of SMT) is of the opinion that relicensing the code isn't a big deal because they wrote almost all of it. https://github.com/SimpleMobileTools/General-Discussion/issu...

Unless the predatory-inclined buyer decided to also try to harvest some value of the open source user base, given the unusual situation of these particular acquired apps being open source?

I doubt that F-Droid would accept their code, also the Adware Toolkits would all need to be also GPL Licensed, otherwise it would be a license violation

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#37

Post by albert180 »

maxloh wrote: post #29
acqbu wrote: post #18

Everyone has a price...

I am more concerned about the licensing issues. Seems that the original author recieved some external contribution in GPLv3.

He thinks that he doesn't need to care about external contributions since he wrote over 90% of the code lol

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#38

Post by Tommstein »

timtom39 wrote: post #13
jqpabc123 wrote: post #8

I have been using eOS for years without any of the Simple Mobile apps. I have checked them out on occasion and I wouldn't call them "bad" but I have always been able to find more capable open source apps that fit my needs better. Just one example, I've used Material Files for years and it has quite a few features not found in Simple File Manager.

What did you find for a gallery? I never found an open one I liked other than simple gallery.

Yep, that and the calendar app are the ones I use. I've been experimenting with Aves as a replacement for the gallery app, but not sure what I think about it yet.

Re: Fossify – Open-source fork of Simple Mobile Tools

#39

Post by neilv »

albert180 wrote: post #36
neilv wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless the predatory-inclined buyer decided to also try to harvest some value of the open source user base, given the unusual situation of these particular acquired apps being open source?

I doubt that F-Droid would accept their code, also the Adware Toolkits would all need to be also GPL Licensed, otherwise it would be a license violation

I should've been more clear: they don't necessarily do the same thing for squeezing value out of open source users that they do out of Play Store users.

F-Droid makes sure they can build the code themselves, but I don't think they vet everything the code does. And Android permission model doesn't control network use well.

Post reply on HN