| 6 Aug 2022 |
 Sylvia | It annoys me too because it implies F-Droid reviewed it all and it fits our criteria when it may not | 06:27:04 |
| Sylvia | It may be good if F-Droid warns users when they try to add an additional repository in the app. Not to scare them, but just so they better understand what they're doing | 06:31:12 |
 jochensp | similar to add-apt-repository, maybe (I think it has some boilerplate text) | 06:32:25 |
| Sylvia | "You're adding an additional app source to F-Droid. Please note that this source is not controlled by the F-Droid team and may contain apps which do not comply with F-Droid's inclusion criteria. Do you want to continue?" Or whatever Debian has as boilerplate, which is probably better :) | 06:34:46 |
![@_oftc_Licaon_Kter[xmpp]:matrix.org](./avatar/Licaon_Kter%5Bxmpp%5D) Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | Maybe someone (ahem Izzy?) can ping them in ~schtrudel~german to "update" the info? | 06:44:49 |
 Izzy | I already pointed that out multiple times – saying the phrasing was unlucky. Didn't get a direct response from them (well, didn't explicitly address them either) – but folks who answered said something like "well, they say that in the details". | 06:53:39 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | Izzy: I meant golem | 06:55:00 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | *heise sorry | 06:55:07 |
| Izzy | Oh. That was just in time. I was about to send a toot to Threema about https://threema.ch/en/faq/libre_installation for a slight rephrase: "Threema Libre is available exclusively via OUR F-Droid REPO". Hm, guess I'll send that nevertheless, cannot hurt. | 07:00:07 |
| Izzy | OK, mail sent to the author. | 07:17:43 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | Izzy: 👍 | 07:27:48 |
| Izzy | Let's see how they react. I even made the effort to explain the differences – visually ("transparency": where's the NonFreeNet with their repo?) Wrote the mail from my account, though, with the hint that I'm one of the maintainers. If needed, I can re-send from team@) | 07:30:07 |
| Izzy | And I guess it should be easy enough for him to find out who wrote all the other F-Droid articles at Heise #D | 07:30:43 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | Nice | 07:40:30 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | linsui: EVMAP is still on autoupdate so it's in even if it would fail the scan-binary pass (that we don't yet enforce)? This would signal to Delta and the rest that it's okay to have a dep artifact (maplibre) build from non-foss deps, before actually deciding project wide this is "the foss way" lol | 14:23:16 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | Afk now, can't check/disable :( | 14:23:26 |
 linsui | In reply to @_oftc_Licaon_Kter[xmpp]:matrix.org
linsui: EVMAP is still on autoupdate so it's in even if it would fail the scan-binary pass (that we don't yet enforce)? This would signal to Delta and the rest that it's okay to have a dep artifact (maplibre) build from non-foss deps, before actually deciding project wide this is "the foss way" lol I'll disable that. Thanks for the ping. | 14:30:25 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | linsui: thanks | 15:26:25 |
| Sylvia | Can we plan some deadline to make a decision? I am worried this'll drag on for months otherwise | 15:33:58 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | Sylvia: I'll pen an Admin issue next week | 15:50:24 |
| Sylvia | Thanks | 15:50:38 |
| 7 Aug 2022 |
 _hc | In reply to @_oftc_jochensp:matrix.org
j.r: I think the question is rather if we accept maplibre as free software and I think the answer was no jochensp: Licaon_Kter[xmpp] j.r grote Sylvia I totally agree that requiring a non-free build dep makes the lib non-free. I'm wondering whether we should consider allowing this with an anti-feature. It seems like a lot of important apps need maplibre. Plus IMHO, I think Osmand's NonFreeAssets is more problematic than Maplibre's build dep issue. Or maybe I don't have the full picture. | 17:14:24 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | That Osmand issue is sooooo old :) odd to find it not "agreed" upon | 17:15:25 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | ...yet | 17:15:55 |
| _hc | In reply to @rdfg77:kde.org
Maybe we can maintain some popular libs in an F-Droid repo. I think this is a great idea! jitpack.io seems OK for that. We could also use the io.gitlab.fdroid namespace on Maven Central for that as well. If this is actually feasible, then it would be a better solution than a non-free build dep idea I just mentioned. | 17:16:21 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | _hc: also, this is a "slippery slope" thing to add the AF | 17:16:46 |
| Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | *imho | 17:16:52 |
| _hc | In reply to @_oftc_Licaon_Kter[xmpp]:matrix.org
That Osmand issue is sooooo old :) odd to find it not "agreed" upon I think our goals to be DFSG-free are still there, and we have moved in the right direction. For example, we used to ship lots of upstream APKs. | 17:17:12 |
| _hc | I hear you on the slippery slope. I think we already do a fair amount of dancing on that slippery slope, that's why I mentinoed it. | 17:17:51 |
| _hc | but of course, I don't want to push too far there | 17:18:28 |
