Comment by surajrmal
20 hours ago
It sure is. Open source doesn't require open development model or even taking outside contributions. It simply requires that you have access to the source and can do things like fork it, which you absolutely can with Android. I think people android to be more like Linux, but that's a very difficult arrangement and has tradeoffs.
Open Source requires buildable code: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43779597>
So if development happens privately, and if they release the source with makefiles (or whatever they use), it is still open source yes?
Because it is exactly what is going on.
I'm not familiar with the specific process. I've heard various claims that Android is not independently buildable, though existence of alternate Android builds suggests otherwise.
Taking the original claim at face value, viz "No they changed their development process to do it behind closed doors and release the code after final release" (<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43778333>), then no, the process isn't Open Source.
The argument then becomes not one of definition (law) but of the facts of the case. Again: I cannot make a determination here, but your haranging wordofx appears misdirected and weakens your case. That's not saying you're not correct, but you're coming across poorly and unpersuasively.