[Replicant] fdroid on replicant: dfsg changes

[Brian Kemp]

It's probably easier to run our own repo, instead of trying to fiddle
with all these software switches.

KISS.

HTH HAND
--BK



On 10/22/2016 02:54 PM, Josh Branning wrote:
> On 22/10/16 02:53, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 07:59:10 +0200
>> Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Den Mon, 22 Aug 2016 20:15:19 +0200
>>> skrev Re: fdroid on replicant: dfsg changes:
>> [...]
>>>>>> The idea is to:
>>>>>> - make F-droid detect Replicant
>>>>>> - Add a way to totally hide applications.
>>>>>> - Make f-droid hide all applications with anti-features, if
>>>>>> running on Replicant.
>> [...]
>>>>> This could be too heavy handed.  For me, this would make it
>>>>> impossible to install Face Slim, OsmAnd, Telegram.  Of these
>>>>> three, only the OsmAnd appear to actually have a licensing issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I could live with the solution above if it means having
>>>>> Replicant a FSF endorsed free distro.
>>
>> Another solution would be to:
>> 1) Detect Replicant in f-droid
>> 2) Add the ability, with the fdroid-data, to produce a repository that
>>     is fully fsdg-compliant. It would take the stock fdroid-data in
>>     input.
>> 3) host that fsdg-compliant repository
>> 4) make f-droid switch to the fsdg-compliant repository, somehow, when
>>     it is run within Replicant.
>>
>> That way a user could still, willingly, switch repository, while
>> keeping Replicant fsdg-compliant at the same time.
>>
>> Another option would be to:
>> 1) Add compilation switches in f-droid, such as --enforce-fsdg or
>>     --enforce-no-anti-features that would hide all the non-fsdg (or all
>>     applications with anti-features)
>> 2) When building f-droid in Replicant, it would be built with that
>>     compilation option.
>>
>> The advantages and disadvantages of that last approach are:
>> - F-droid wound't be reproducible between Replicant and the official
>>    version.
>> - A user could uninstall Replicant's f-droid and install the official
>>    one instead to get software not shown with the version
>>    shipped in Replicant.
>> - I've no idea if compilation switches are fsdg-compliant or not.
>>    For me it looks like a source version of debian non-free repository.
>>    Coreboot for instance already has such setting, when doing make
>>    menuconfig, there is the "[ ] Allow use of binary-only repository"
>>    option[1].
>>
>>> I see that Replicant is mentioned there now, but this sounds strange
>>> to me given the concern with fdroid.
>> I think f-droid was fsdg-compliant at the time where Replicant was added
>> to the list of FSDG distributions.
>>
>> Privileged extension:
>> ---------------------
>> I tested the privileged extension on Replicant 4.2, it now works great,
>> and I can now update all the applications way faster. I can even
>> install them faster.
>>
>>>> There are large security and usability advantages to including
>> What are the security advantages?
>> As I understand f-droid doesn't require root permissions.
>>
>> References:
>> -----------
>> [1] I mentioned it because having real world example can help,
>>      especially if we need to ask around to see if it is compliant.
>>
>> Denis.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Replicant mailing list
>> Replicant at lists.osuosl.org
>> http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
>>
> 
> I think hiding all applications with anti-features could be a bit heavy
> handed too.
> 
> Some things like upstream non-free, adds, non-free network services and
> possibly tracking are not good things, but the user may feel that they
> still want to install the app, and the app may not directly conflict
> with the fsf guidelines.
> 
> Other things like non-free dependencies and non-free assets should be
> avoided completely.
> 
> I think it may be wise to have a discussion about which of the following
> /have/ to be removed to comply, and make sure we're not just removing
> things because they are not preferable.
> 
> https://f-droid.org/wiki/page/Antifeatures
> 
> For the software that doesn't comply, hopefully there is a way to remove
> those features from the sources.
> 
> Josh
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Replicant mailing list
> Replicant at lists.osuosl.org
> http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 213 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/replicant/attachments/20161023/c41bb90e/attachment.asc>