3 ms·
Side question: since this is GPL3, how does that work with APK signing? A quick peek at the docs [1] makes it seem like this would be just as much a problem on
by bragr 3y ago
Side question: since this is GPL3, how does that work with APK signing? A quick peek at the docs [1] makes it seem like this would be just as much a problem on F-Droid as any other app store.
[1] https://f-droid.org/en/docs/Signing_Process/ https://f-droid.org/en/docs/Signing_Process/
- ksjskskskkk 3y agowhat are you even talking about? linked page makes no mention to any gpl3 consideration. and i don't see how distribution peculiarities have anything to do with the license. are you just attempting a low effort gpl3 FUD or are you honestly confused at something concrete that you failed to describe?
- bragr 3y agoI was honestly asking about the intersection of app store code signing and the anti-tivoization clause in 3.0 (I assumed everyone knew that was the major change or 3.0), but I guess I touched a nerve.
- boomboomsubban 3y agoI don't think signing counts as a modification, or there's some aspect of your query I'm not getting. Either way, the GPL 3 was designed with signing already being a thing, GPG had been out for 5+ years. And if signing broke the GPL, I imagine Stallman would have been raising a huge fit about it for decades.
- ksjskskskkk 3y agoapp store code signing is no different than a mirror having a private ssl keys for the domain you are downloading from or a closed source including a gpl3 Library in its packaging. both have nothing with the license and are a common FUD argument by people who do not like the implied freedoms of the gpl when arguing for more permissively comercial licenses, so apologize if i wrongly mistook you for the more probable case.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y agoWhat conflict do you see there? You can take the code, compile it, and install it; what restriction does the signature impose?