Comment by rlpb
15 days ago
> closing out anonymous (but good) software
I don’t think we should be framing their new rules like this. They are closing out F-Droid, which is not anonymous, due to a technicality of their implementation. At best, they are collateral damage. At worst, it is malicious compliance in response to a directive that was supposed to ensure their continued existence.
It's f-droid that's clearly calling this out. from the post:
>The F-Droid project cannot require that developers register their apps through Google, but at the same time, we cannot “take over” the application identifiers for the open-source apps we distribute, as that would effectively seize exclusive distribution rights to those applications
F-droid does not want to take responsibility for the app.
> F-droid does not want to take responsibility for the app.
That's not how I read it. They cannot "take over" exclusive control of application identifiers, that's all. For example, this would prevent a developer publishing the same app to both F-Droid and to the Google Play Store. I see nothing that says that they aren't willing to take responsibility for what they publish.
What is meant by responsibility? If something happens because of the app - you go to the responsible person. F-droid does not want to be the outreach person/org for any issue on an app.
But per Google policy - they will go to the f-droid if a govt request came in for that apk, as that's what the new policy would have on file. This is hence what f-droid is voicing concern on.
4 replies →