On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 21:16:49 -0400 David Heath <dheath...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, yes, here, here, I agree we could have a version labelled GITMHILIR > Hello. For what it's worth, I think non-free should be available to > encourage adoption of Replicant. Would it be acceptable for > Replicant's F-droid to simply hide all non-free by default or clearly > present a non-free warning for those apps? This seems quite simple if > F-droid's repo allows for categorical tagging, but if that is not > possible, perhaps segregating the repos is necessary. I understand > that it may be desirable to not ship any non-free repo, in which case > the latter might be necessary, but adding the non-free repo should at > least be convenient for new users who want the same Android apps they > have become used to. Personally, I believe just using Replicant is a > good step in the right direction. Clear warnings and categorical > stratification seem ideal to me. > > On 23 Oct 2016 8:00 am, <replicant-requ...@lists.osuosl.org> wrote: > > > Send Replicant mailing list submissions to > > replicant@lists.osuosl.org > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > replicant-requ...@lists.osuosl.org > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > replicant-ow...@lists.osuosl.org > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Replicant digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: fdroid on replicant: dfsg changes (Josh Branning) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 19:54:21 +0100 > > From: Josh Branning <lovell.josh...@gmail.com> > > To: replicant@lists.osuosl.org > > Subject: Re: [Replicant] fdroid on replicant: dfsg changes > > Message-ID: <580bb5dd.2050...@gmail.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > > > > On 22/10/16 02:53, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote: > > > On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 07:59:10 +0200 > > > Simon Josefsson <si...@josefsson.org> wrote: > > > > > >> Den Mon, 22 Aug 2016 20:15:19 +0200 > > >> skrev Re: fdroid on replicant: dfsg changes: > > > [...] > > >>>>> The idea is to: > > >>>>> - make F-droid detect Replicant > > >>>>> - Add a way to totally hide applications. > > >>>>> - Make f-droid hide all applications with anti-features, if > > >>>>> running on Replicant. > > > [...] > > >>>> This could be too heavy handed. For me, this would make it > > >>>> impossible to install Face Slim, OsmAnd, Telegram. Of these > > >>>> three, only the OsmAnd appear to actually have a licensing > > >>>> issue. > > >>>> > > >>>> However, I could live with the solution above if it means > > >>>> having Replicant a FSF endorsed free distro. > > > > > > Another solution would be to: > > > 1) Detect Replicant in f-droid > > > 2) Add the ability, with the fdroid-data, to produce a repository > > > that is fully fsdg-compliant. It would take the stock fdroid-data > > > in input. > > > 3) host that fsdg-compliant repository > > > 4) make f-droid switch to the fsdg-compliant repository, somehow, > > > when it is run within Replicant. > > > > > > That way a user could still, willingly, switch repository, while > > > keeping Replicant fsdg-compliant at the same time. > > > > > > Another option would be to: > > > 1) Add compilation switches in f-droid, such as --enforce-fsdg or > > > --enforce-no-anti-features that would hide all the non-fsdg > > > (or all applications with anti-features) > > > 2) When building f-droid in Replicant, it would be built with that > > > compilation option. > > > > > > The advantages and disadvantages of that last approach are: > > > - F-droid wound't be reproducible between Replicant and the > > > official version. > > > - A user could uninstall Replicant's f-droid and install the > > > official one instead to get software not shown with the version > > > shipped in Replicant. > > > - I've no idea if compilation switches are fsdg-compliant or not. > > > For me it looks like a source version of debian non-free > > > repository. Coreboot for instance already has such setting, when > > > doing make menuconfig, there is the "[ ] Allow use of binary-only > > > repository" option[1]. > > > > > >> I see that Replicant is mentioned there now, but this sounds > > >> strange to me given the concern with fdroid. > > > I think f-droid was fsdg-compliant at the time where Replicant > > > was added to the list of FSDG distributions. > > > > > > Privileged extension: > > > --------------------- > > > I tested the privileged extension on Replicant 4.2, it now works > > > great, and I can now update all the applications way faster. I > > > can even install them faster. > > > > > >>> There are large security and usability advantages to including > > > What are the security advantages? > > > As I understand f-droid doesn't require root permissions. > > > > > > References: > > > ----------- > > > [1] I mentioned it because having real world example can help, > > > especially if we need to ask around to see if it is > > > compliant. > > > > > > Denis. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Replicant mailing list > > > Replicant@lists.osuosl.org > > > http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant > > > > > > > I think hiding all applications with anti-features could be a bit > > heavy handed too. > > > > Some things like upstream non-free, adds, non-free network services > > and possibly tracking are not good things, but the user may feel > > that they still want to install the app, and the app may not > > directly conflict with the fsf guidelines. > > > > Other things like non-free dependencies and non-free assets should > > be avoided completely. > > > > I think it may be wise to have a discussion about which of the > > following /have/ to be removed to comply, and make sure we're not > > just removing things because they are not preferable. > > > > https://f-droid.org/wiki/page/Antifeatures > > > > For the software that doesn't comply, hopefully there is a way to > > remove those features from the sources. > > > > Josh > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Subject: Digest Footer > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Replicant mailing list > > Replicant@lists.osuosl.org > > http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of Replicant Digest, Vol 193, Issue 4 > > ***************************************** > > _______________________________________________ Replicant mailing list Replicant@lists.osuosl.org http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
