141–150 of 284 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The preinstalled apps are part of the OS.
That cannot be true, when I install e.g., Ubuntu system, there are plenty of applications installed for me, with incompatible licenses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their license is invalid due to being GPLv3. GPLv3 cannot be included in GrapheneOS as that would necessitate GrapheneOS give up their permissive licensing. Refra Gallery is licensed as Apache 2.0, which is a permissive license GrapheneOS can bundle in the OS.
Can the Linux kernel be included in the OS?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is to access an e2ee protocol bundled by default on many devices, and is cross-platform. GrapheneOS does recommend using superior platforms like Signal, but that is 3rd party, and thus has adoptability issues in convincing people to use it. Just because better platforms exist does not mean RCS should be ignored.
Thanks for clarification. Anything first party from Big Tech is a lost cause privacy wise. At the same time, nobody uses it (maybe that is different in the USA, don't know). So for me this would be ultra-low prio as I (and I expect almost every other GOS user) will never use it. But I believe GOS knows what it is doing.
If the protocol is properly e2ee, it does not matter who backs it or hosts it. GrapheneOS would be in control of the client which is what matters in an e2ee system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The intended purpose of RCS was to be federated between carriers, just like SMS. If you centralise it then it's just a worse version of any of Google's abandoned chat apps. But there's a realpolitik reason to insist on centralised RCS: because it's already got the reputation of decentralisation, it makes it look like Google is better than it actually is.
> The intended purpose of RCS was to be federated between carriers, just like SMS. Oof, so it was essentially destined to fail when the spec was being written.
[flagged]
https://github.com/GrapheneOS/Messaging/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3...
Every release of GrapheneOS and GrapheneOS apps goes through internal testing followed by public Alpha channel testing and then public Beta channel testing before reaching the Stable channel. No update goes to Stable without internal, Alpha and Beta channel testing phases.
We've been heavily testing our Messaging overhaul as we've been doing it and we've been making a lot more tests than we used to. It's already in quite good shape and is ready for Alpha channel testing. That's what we're referring to.
There are excellent FOSS gallery apps already, like the Fossify suite. Why not use them I wonder?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their license is invalid due to being GPLv3. GPLv3 cannot be included in GrapheneOS as that would necessitate GrapheneOS give up their permissive licensing. Refra Gallery is licensed as Apache 2.0, which is a permissive license GrapheneOS can bundle in the OS.
Can the Linux kernel be included in the OS?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The preinstalled apps are part of the OS.
That cannot be true, when I install e.g., Ubuntu system, there are plenty of applications installed for me, with incompatible licenses.
We use GPLv2 and permissive licensing for GrapheneOS to avoid more restrictive licensing than the AOSP. We'll happily use GPLv3 and AGPLv3 for components outside of GrapheneOS if we think it's the best fit for specific projects. We aren't currently licensing anything as GPLv3/AGPLv3 but we aren't strictly opposed to it outside of the OS.
We'll use what we think are the best open source licenses for what we want to achieve. What we want to achieve is usually broad adoption of our code with painless usage of it. That means we usually choose permissive licenses. We use GPLv2 in certain cases such as Vanadium where we decided we wanted extensions to our code to be under a compatible open source license instead of a source available license or GPLv3.