Hacker News Reader

Comment by josephcsible | Hacker News Reader

Please remove "Also available on FDroid" from the page. This app is not available on F-Droid and isn't allowed to be added to it since it isn't open source.

View on HN

where it says available on fdroid it links to their personal fdroid repository. plenty of projects both open source and not have their own fdroid repository. fdroid is both a repository that only allows open source software and a packaging infrastructure tool for people hosting their own repositories. based on the fact their claim that they are on fdroid literally hyperlinks to their fdroid repository i don't see how anyone could find that misleading. if anything it's fdroids fault for giving their own repository the same name as their infrastructure tool instead of doing what every other project did and give them separate names. for example docker and dockerhub, flatpak and flathub, etc.

here is a list of 100+ not official fdroid repositories. https://github.com/userkilled/FDroid-List-Repository

> if anything it's fdroids fault for giving their own repository the same name as their infrastructure tool instead of doing what every other project did and give them separate names. for example docker and dockerhub, flatpak and flathub, etc.

F-That

Yep, as a user I didn't find it confusing at all. F-Droid is designed for and around adding custom repos. FUTO links to their own repo and it all works fine.

I'd definitely consider this as being "available on F-Droid".

Should say "Available Via", that would further reinforce the status quo.

I agree that is misleading. It has its own F-droid compatible repo so you can use an F-Droid client. When I hear "available on F-Droid" I assume it means its in the F-Droid repo.

Indeed, it is "Source First" license, dev(s) reasoning here: https://futo.org/about/futo-statement-on-opensource/

They make a very good case against corporate-friendly licences like MIT/BSD, which I definitely agree with, but say nothing about why they don't use AGPL. Honestly I think the problem with A/GPL is that they are considered "uncool". You just can't use them, because reasons.

Who decides what is cool? That's right, the marketing departments of huge corporations...

AGPL would still allow a third party to fork their code and create a commercial product out of it, which is what they are opposed to.

The AGPL only requires that the host also provides their code.

No, it also requires that it's licensed under the AGPL, meaning the users get free software.

Right yes, provide their code licensed under AGPL, it's an important distinction, thanks.

What it doesn't ban people from doing is selling a service, which is different from their license that allows only non-commercial uses.

Maybe F-Droid should just call their official blessed repo "F-Repo" to end the confusion, because this is clearly available through F-Droid, just not in the F-Droid official repo...

Being able to side-load a random unsigned binary via the fdroid app, or getting it from the F-Droid repository where they do independently signed (and ideally reproducible) builds, are very different things.

The F-droid team does not have a high bar to be dicks. They do it to ensure their users get binaries that match the published code to prevent increasingly supply chain attacks.

The standards are there for good reason, and if you do not understand those reasons, then use a license that allows the people that do understand to distribute your software for you.

Very very few software engineers understand supply chain attacks or how to prevent them.

It is available in fdroid on my ungoogled phone. I don't know what you're talking about

https://search.f-droid.org/?q=grayjay&lang=en

> It looks like F-Droid does not have any apps matching your search string "grayjay"

You're using a third-party repo that allows proprietary apps. The real F-Droid only allows FOSS ones.

It should be written like "available as a f-droid repo"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com