In the specified comment GrapheneOS explicitly stated that they have no opposition against non-free binaries and proprietary programs. Doesn’t Free software requires it to not host non free binaries? This is not even firmware

  • lunar_dust_222@sh.itjust.worksOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    But what about endorsing play store when alternatives are available? Yes it’s sandboxes but then also other more open solutions exists

    • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Is it really endorsement to offer the user upon initial setup to install it, along with fdroid?

      I’d say that’s just general compatibility, most users have at least one play store app they can’t just stop using, in my case that would be the banking apps I need to be able to pay online.

        • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Is that a recent change? I somewhat distinctly remember being offered Fdroid during the initial setup as well.

          • paradox2011@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’ve been using GrapheneOS for about a year and I’ve never seen F-Droid bundled in their installer or app store. They’ve been vocally against F-Droid for quite some time. Other more FOSS focused projects bundle F-Droid.

            • refalo@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I don’t think it’s about FOSS-ness as to why they don’t like F-Droid, but security and privacy. They don’t want to give up signing keys and compilation duties to F-Droid, and I don’t blame them. Even with reproducible builds, almost nobody is publicly verifying projects that claim to have them (Signal anyone?).