3 ms·

So if development happens privately, and if they release the source with makefiles (or whatever they use), it is still open source yes? Because it is exactly w

• dredmorbius 1y ago
  I'm not familiar with the specific process. I've heard various claims that Android is not independently buildable, though existence of alternate Android builds suggests otherwise. Taking the original claim at face value, viz "No they changed their development process to do it behind closed doors and release the code after final release" (<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43778333 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43778333>), then no, the process isn't Open Source. The argument then becomes not one of definition (law) but of the facts of the case. Again: I cannot make a determination here, but your haranging wordofx appears misdirected and weakens your case. That's not saying you're not correct, but you're coming across poorly and unpersuasively.
  • bitpush 1y ago
    So how does graphene OS people build the OS from Android? Or Samsung build Android for their phones? Or Motorola? Do you think Google is compiling the OS for these folks, and releasing to them?
    • dredmorbius 1y ago
      I've heard various claims that Android is not independently buildable, though existence of alternate Android builds suggests otherwise. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43788459 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43788459> You're continuing to argue fact as if you're arguing law, which again, greatly weakens your overall argument, in addition to being needlessly confrontational and aggressive.