4 ms·

> Documentation for developing for the open source operating system. Is fuchsia Android style open source or a true OSS?

by zaro 7y ago

pmarin 7y ago
What do you mean by true OSS?
- Un1corn 7y ago
  Android is more of an open core project. AOSP is technically fully open source but when people say Android they mean the Android version of Google with the play store and play services. The naming is confusing because what people call Android is not actually Android like what people call Linux is not actually Linux but a distribution.
- ChrisSD 7y ago
  Even with ASOP it tends to be more of a code dump than an open source development process. If you're an OEM you get to see it earlier in development (and get to dump your own OEM patches in there) but for most people the actual development is done behind closed doors.
IshKebab 7y ago
Android style is true open source. I presume you mean "is Google going to work closely with non-Googlers to develop it" and I doubt it.
- gorio 7y ago
  I think it is more if they will encourage any use outside of the control of Google. Or if they, like with Android where they illegally obstructed companies from doing so, will even discourage it.
  - MayeulC 7y ago
    That, plus they actively deprecated open source part in favor of their closed-source alternatives, and basically made the Android operating system useless (especially with regards to compatibility with the android SDK) without their closed-source parts. So, it is technically "Open Source", but I am not sure I would call it "Free software" in the spirit. Especially the permissive license, which gives developers free reign over their forks. I really like being able to get kernel sources from various phone vendors, and that's what enables projects such as postmarketos or lineage (though lineage is less concerned about getting the kernel sources/upstreaming, it seems). I just wish there was an anti-tivoization clause in the Linux kernel license.
    - mkr-hn 7y ago
      I've always been conflicted about that. They started down that path in response to intransigent OEMs leaving people with year old phones full of vulnerabilities, but it's turned into a justification to load all the important userspace into apps they control. On the one hand, it's great that old phones see some updates. On the other, it's terrible that Google used it as an excuse to reject and weaken the very ecosystem that propelled them to where they are. They've made some efforts to improve the ease of updating older phones for both OEMs and users, but they keep key components locked down.
- seba_dos1 7y ago
  AOSP style is true open source, not Android. There are not too many phones sold with AOSP, and Android is a closed platform built on top of open AOSP core.
  - ulfw 7y ago
    A phone is frankly unusable with just AOSP with today's apps
    - Jabbles 7y ago
      Today's open source apps?
      - cameronbrown 7y ago
        Not saying I agree with the state of things, but very few people use open source apps other than a few high-profile ones (Chrome, Firefox, Telegram, et Al). We need open source alternatives to everything for AOSP to be truly viable again.
        JetSpiegel 7y ago
        LineageOS with F-Droid practically achieves this, but Google's contracts stop OEM from distributing this. The same situation from Microsoft and Linux a while back.
        cameronbrown 7y ago
        You or I may be able and willing to buy OSS phones, but the average consumer never would common proprietary software (FB, YouTube). OEMs would never bother selling them in the first place, obligations or not.
        JetSpiegel 7y ago
        Can't you redistribute NewPipe, and the whole shebang? I agree that selling phones with AOSP/LineageOS only is worthless. For Facebook, you can make a custom Firefox bookmark, or one of those WebViews hard-coded to Facebook.

> Documentation for developing for the open source operating system. Is fuchsia Android style open source or a true OSS?

by zaro 7y ago

> Documentation for developing for the open source operating system. Is fuchsia Android style open source or a true OSS?

pmarin 7y ago

What do you mean by true OSS?

Un1corn 7y ago
Android is more of an open core project. AOSP is technically fully open source but when people say Android they mean the Android version of Google with the play store and play services. The naming is confusing because what people call Android is not actually Android like what people call Linux is not actually Linux but a distribution.
ChrisSD 7y ago
Even with ASOP it tends to be more of a code dump than an open source development process. If you're an OEM you get to see it earlier in development (and get to dump your own OEM patches in there) but for most people the actual development is done behind closed doors.

IshKebab 7y ago

Android style is true open source. I presume you mean "is Google going to work closely with non-Googlers to develop it" and I doubt it.

gorio 7y ago
I think it is more if they will encourage any use outside of the control of Google. Or if they, like with Android where they illegally obstructed companies from doing so, will even discourage it.
- MayeulC 7y ago
  That, plus they actively deprecated open source part in favor of their closed-source alternatives, and basically made the Android operating system useless (especially with regards to compatibility with the android SDK) without their closed-source parts. So, it is technically "Open Source", but I am not sure I would call it "Free software" in the spirit. Especially the permissive license, which gives developers free reign over their forks. I really like being able to get kernel sources from various phone vendors, and that's what enables projects such as postmarketos or lineage (though lineage is less concerned about getting the kernel sources/upstreaming, it seems). I just wish there was an anti-tivoization clause in the Linux kernel license.
  - mkr-hn 7y ago
    I've always been conflicted about that. They started down that path in response to intransigent OEMs leaving people with year old phones full of vulnerabilities, but it's turned into a justification to load all the important userspace into apps they control. On the one hand, it's great that old phones see some updates. On the other, it's terrible that Google used it as an excuse to reject and weaken the very ecosystem that propelled them to where they are. They've made some efforts to improve the ease of updating older phones for both OEMs and users, but they keep key components locked down.
seba_dos1 7y ago
AOSP style is true open source, not Android. There are not too many phones sold with AOSP, and Android is a closed platform built on top of open AOSP core.
- ulfw 7y ago
  A phone is frankly unusable with just AOSP with today's apps
  - Jabbles 7y ago
    Today's open source apps?
    - cameronbrown 7y ago
      Not saying I agree with the state of things, but very few people use open source apps other than a few high-profile ones (Chrome, Firefox, Telegram, et Al). We need open source alternatives to everything for AOSP to be truly viable again.
      - JetSpiegel 7y ago
        LineageOS with F-Droid practically achieves this, but Google's contracts stop OEM from distributing this. The same situation from Microsoft and Linux a while back.
        cameronbrown 7y ago
        You or I may be able and willing to buy OSS phones, but the average consumer never would common proprietary software (FB, YouTube). OEMs would never bother selling them in the first place, obligations or not.
        JetSpiegel 7y ago
        Can't you redistribute NewPipe, and the whole shebang? I agree that selling phones with AOSP/LineageOS only is worthless. For Facebook, you can make a custom Firefox bookmark, or one of those WebViews hard-coded to Facebook.