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

341–350 of 350 posts

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

#341

Post by nonplus »

account42 wrote: post #333
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguably, they aren't even distributing the source code at all anymore. The GPL defines "source code" as "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it". I would be willing to bet any amount of money that no Google developer makes modifications using a tarball that's missing commit history. The preferred form for making modifications is a source control repository.

While it would be nice if it worked that way, I think there are too many historical examples of tarball distribution of GPL code to make that argument.

I begrudgingly agree. I would like to make a case that times have moved on/the definition of preferred has changed; but I don't think that would hold up on its own as a legal argument.

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

#342

Post by pjmlp »

bitpush wrote: post #61
shevy-java wrote: post #39

I don't think the real focus is on the tags, but on the delay here via a form as well as human interaction. Worded differently, the simplest way to provide the source code is IMO via a URL that you can just wget. At the least this is done by so many projects out there. Google refusing to do so means Google wants to violate the GPLv2, since their alternatives are inferior. https://distrowatch.com/ has many convenient…

> Google refusing to do so means Google wants to violate the GPLv2 Not an expert in GPL, but does it say that the source code needs to be provided by a url?

None at all, when GPL was designed, shipping floppies and tapes was still quite common.

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

#343

Post by pjmlp »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #318
GuB-42 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, and it doesn't even have to be provided for free as long as the price is reasonable with regard to the delivery costs. The GPL was made when mailing disks was a common way of delivering software and it is still a valid way to do it. But the most important part is that once you have that source code, no one can stop you from redistributing it in a cheaper and more convenient way. It means that in theory, only a si…

The GPL requires use of a medium customarily used for software interchange; not a medium that used to be customarily used for software interchange. It's not customary to mail software on disks anymore so it doesn't fulfill the GPL anymore.

I guess a lawyer can easily challenge that point of view, when the license doesn't explicitly specify how.

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

#344

Post by Zigurd »

bitpush wrote: post #293
Zigurd wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HarmonyOS?

Isn't HarmonyOS Chinese? The alternative you're proposing is using Chinese OS?

Yes but it's only a viable alternative if they do better at supporting the open source community.

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

#345

Post by dredmorbius »

MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #302
thyristan wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fairphones are easy to unlock, repairable, have a long lifetime and offer a variety of different operating system distributions.

I would love to have a Fairphone, but sadly I live in the USA.

It's been possible to buy Fairphone indirectly in the US for quite some time, as I understand.

Fairphone have just announced direct sales within the past week or so (noted by others here).

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

#346

Post by dredmorbius »

tsimionescu wrote: post #187
JasonHarrison wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What will you purchase instead? It sucks that the modern smartphone OS market is a duopoly.

Since they're saying "Google phone", not "Android phone", I imagine the next purchase could be a Samsung or such.

If you want GrapheneOS, the only other option, still pending, is Motorolla.

A partnership was announced earlier this year, but no devices will be delivered until 2027.

See: https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/117078064184215730>.

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

#347

Post by dredmorbius »

grapheneos wrote: post #199
rob74 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it's as you wrote: they are making the source available, albeit in a very inconvenient way, and because there is no time limit specified, they're complying with the letter of the GPL (although not with its spirit), so you can't even realistically sue them. And the number of people who buy new Pixels to immediately install GrapheneOS on them is (no offense) negligible, so I don't think they'll see a sales impact…

> they are making the source available Not in the preferred form for modification expected by the build system and not in a reasonable amount of time. It's artificially delayed with no legitimate reason. > And the number of people who buy new Pixels to immediately install GrapheneOS on them is (no offense) negligible Nearly all of our current users bought a device specifically to install GrapheneOS. Our current userb…

And just to emphasize, "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it" is a direct quote from GPLv3, under which the Linux kernel is licensed.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html>

If GrapheneOS are finding the Google Drive option inadequate, they might choose to invoke Section 6 clause b of the GPL "Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium)".

Note that AOSP as a whole is covered under the Apache 2.0 licence, which permits but does not obligate third-party distribution of source. That is, it's not a "copyleft" licence in the sense of the GPL.

Googles notes on why BSD/MIT/Apache licences are preferred are ... informative.

https://source.android.com/docs/setup/contribute/licenses>

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

#348

Post by g-b-r »

thyristan wrote: post #298
doe88 wrote: post #276

What's the point of Android if not of being open?!! I don't see any value for them to be closed or combative. It's sad to see Google, once the greatest company on earth, lose absolutely everything of what they made them great in just a matter of a couple of years.

The purpose of Android for Google is to push users into paid services, Google search, collect some play store fees and some data. None of that actually requires Android to be really open. Just saying something about "open" works as advertisement though...

I think data is the first purpose by far, and I wouldn't describe it as "some"

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

#349

Post by D4Ha »

codedokode wrote: post #300
D4Ha wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your point, However the majority of Android devices have lots of closed source firmware/drivers, a large part of the Android OS doesn't run without them. I'm refering to Bootloaders, TrustZone OS, Trusted Applications, then firmware for Bluetooth, Wifi, GPU, Sensors and power management. All of those are always closed source binary blobs running in the background.

You should be using open-source firmware without any "untrusted" zones.

its not always possible to flash your trust zone firmware, you get what the vendor forces on you.

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

#350

Post by hskimse »

grapheneos wrote: post #112
hskimse wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe AOSP source code

It's not AOSP but rather Pixels. Pixels are no longer support by AOSP. They went out of the way to no longer push any of the Pixel specific repositories or releases to AOSP. The impact is mainly that Pixels are now harder to support than a lot of other devices rather than easier. They'll sell far fewer Pixels over time because of these decisions. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49369087

I didn't know Pixel maintained its own kernel patches. And if there is a delay in providing that code to Pixel buyers, from my perspective, that looks like a violation of the GPL.
Post reply on HN