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

Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

grapheneos.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 350 posts

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#91

Post by ajross »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #82
Brian_K_White wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's paying a bill in pennies.

> It's paying a bill in pennies. This is actually a problem that is solved in German law: § 3 Münzgesetz (MünzG), Absatz 1 [§ 3 Coins Act, article 1] "§ 3 Annahme- und Umtauschpflicht (1) Niemand ist verpflichtet, deutsche Euro-Gedenkmünzen im Betrag von mehr als 200 Euro bei einer einzelnen Zahlung anzunehmen. Erfolgt eine einzelne Zahlung sowohl in Euro-Münzen als auch in deutschen Euro-Gedenkmünzen, ist niemand ve…

To clarify given the subject at hand: German courts are 100% not going to find a Google Drive link to be disallowed by the GPLv2. That's literally about physical coins.

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#92

Post by flotzam »

phire wrote: post #81
flotzam wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We didn't have git tags when GPL was written in 1989 The GPLv2 requires "a medium customarily used for software interchange", not "a medium customarily used in 1989 for software interchange". Customs are the customs of the time someone is releasing the work.

“a medium customarily used for software interchange“ Interesting choice of cropping for that quote. If you had included the previous word, it would be blindly obvious that “on a medium“ is only talking about the transport layer, not the format of the data. So it would exclude distributing source code on tape, or even optical discs, as nobody uses those anymore. About the only medium used for source code distribution…

> If you had included the previous word, it would be blindly obvious that “on a medium“ is only talking about the transport layer, not the format of the data.

I can see your point. But OTOH if providing the "preferred form of the work for making modifications" requires not squashing commits into a big mess to frustrate someone trying to make sense of the code (I'm sure the Google engineers making modifications prefer to look at individual commits!), and Google is using Git anyway to create those commits, then it seems to me like there's an argument to be made that the customary medium used to interchange a range of Git commits is Git.

But the stronger argument is that the Android build system expects everything to be in Git: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49368983

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#94

Post by ProAm »

g-b-r wrote: post #27

Let's just forget about the tags, the point is that they're not publishing what Graphene OS needs on any git repository that they can access. Even before that it had been jokes of repositories, but at least you didn't have to ask for someone every time and wait for them to respond to the request. (that's my understanding)

i.e. its no longer open source, now access is granted by permission.

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#95

Post by demibabs »

shevy-java wrote: post #41
jmole wrote: post #4

“In violation of GPL” is a stretch. Can’t imagine Google is making the process of obtaining source code easier on themselves though. Android has always been more source-open than “open source”. The vast majority of community contributions that make it into the codebase are security fixes and small bug fixes. Everything else is essentially all the work of Google and (to some extent) Samsung.

Why would it be a "stretch"? The basic requirement is whether the source code is available - and made available. Are you certain that Google's solution here is ensuring that the source code is easily made available? So many other projects just provide a wget-able link. Why does Google want to make it harder to obtain the source code than those other projects? > Android has always been more source-open than “open sour…

> The basic requirement is whether the source code is available - and made available. Are you certain that Google's solution here is ensuring that the source code is easily made available?

The word “easily” sure did sneak into this sentence

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#96

Post by pas »

ProAm wrote: post #94
g-b-r wrote: post #27

Let's just forget about the tags, the point is that they're not publishing what Graphene OS needs on any git repository that they can access. Even before that it had been jokes of repositories, but at least you didn't have to ask for someone every time and wait for them to respond to the request. (that's my understanding)

i.e. its no longer open source, now access is granted by permission.

what does the license say? provide source when asked or publish source?

OSI is not clear on this either. ("Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost, [...]")

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#97

Post by simoncion »

ajross wrote: post #79
simoncion wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suppose forcing a means to share the source code could have been too restrictive, but the GPL only speaks about the shape of the source code itself (it should be "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it"), not how it is shared... With the greatest of respect, you've forgotten what the licenses say. GPLv2: [0] 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2)…

People are getting way too bent out of shape over that "medium customarily used for software interchange" bit. It doesn't mean github. It doesn't mean "the medium I use most commonly". Basically, if you think courts are going to be OK with interpreting "download from this FTP site" as acceptable but "download the same tarball from Drive" as unacceptable, you're fooling yourself. Drive is fine, given the spirit of the…

> People are getting way too bent out of shape...

I hope you're not including me in "people". Remember that I said:

  There might be some merit to a claim that Google Drive isn't a medium customarily used for software distribution these days, but ...  I'm skeptical that it's a violation of the letter of the GPL.
I was quoting the text of the GPL to point out to jraph that it absolutely does restrict how source code is distributed to ensure that licensees are obligated to distribute in a format that's actually useful to the typical recipient, rather than permitting a licensee to ship a couple-hundred pounds of printouts and still be in compliance with the license.

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#98

Post by buzer »

mjg59 wrote: post #80
mikestorrent wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't wait for pallets of paper to get shipped out to comply maliciously

The license requires that it be distributed on a medium customarily used for software interchange, and I don't think you'd stand a good chance of arguing that paper satisfies that.

Google Drive is customarily used for software interchange?

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#99

Post by beanjuiceII »

mjg59 wrote: post #89
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But after one person does this, the source code access is a solved problem.

But nobody has done this, which is why it's a problem for Graphene

Maybe should someone should do it then?

Re: Google has stopped pushing Git tags for some Android source code

#100

Post by mjg59 »

buzer wrote: post #98
mjg59 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The license requires that it be distributed on a medium customarily used for software interchange, and I don't think you'd stand a good chance of arguing that paper satisfies that.

Google Drive is customarily used for software interchange?

My personal website isn't customarily used for software interchange, but http is. I think getting into discussions about which websites are acceptable and which aren't feels like a bad place.
Post reply on HN