3 ms·
> they are making the source available Not in the preferred form for modification expected by the build system and not in a reasonable amount of time. It's art
by grapheneos 2mo ago
> they are making the source available
Not in the preferred form for modification expected by the build system and not in a reasonable amount of time. It's artificially delayed with no legitimate reason.
> And the number of people who buy new Pixels to immediately install GrapheneOS on them is (no offense) negligible
Nearly all of our current users bought a device specifically to install GrapheneOS. Our current userbase is around 500k and many of those are users had one or more earlier devices with GrapheneOS. Our userbase is rapidly growing. Look up how many Pixels are actually sold in a year. It's not negligible at all.
There are also many large companies wanting GrapheneOS devices with official support from the OEM.
- rob74 2mo agoSorry, I stand corrected: Despite owning a Pixel 9 Pro myself, I didn't realize Google's Android phones market share was so tiny (1.1%! according to https://www.appbrain.com/stats/top-manufacturers https://www.appbrain.com/stats/top-manufacturers). In that case, of course, the number of Pixels bought because of GrapheneOS could be a significant fraction.
- microtherion 2mo agoThat’s 1.1% of ~1.1-1.2B Android phones sold per year. I dont’t know how long the average GrapheneOS user holds on to their device, but if 25% of them per year buy a new phone (rather than upcycling a used one or using their previous phone another year), that would amount to about 1% of Google’s annual sales at best.
- dredmorbius 2mo agoAnd just to emphasize, "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it" is a direct quote from GPLv3, under which the Linux kernel is licensed. <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html> If GrapheneOS are finding the Google Drive option inadequate, they might choose to invoke Section 6 clause b of the GPL "Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium)". Note that AOSP as a whole is covered under the Apache 2.0 licence, which permits but does not obligate third-party distribution of source. That is, it's not a "copyleft" licence in the sense of the GPL. Googles notes on why BSD/MIT/Apache licences are preferred are ... informative. <https://source.android.com/docs/setup/contribute/licenses https://source.android.com/docs/setup/contribute/licenses>