Google replaced Git tags for certain source code with obtaining via Google Drive

(grapheneos.social)

77 points by Animux2 hours ago

6 comments

dgellow1 hour ago
Quoting the first tweet:> Google replaced pushing Git tags for certain source code with obtaining source code via Google Drive after making a request through Google Forms. It's completely ridiculous and they've gradually become very slow at handling requests. They're in clear violation of the GPLv2 now.
- petcat5 minutes ago
 > They're in clear violation of the GPLv2 now.I don't think they are? They could just as easily require requests for the source code to be made through the regular mail instead of a Google form. It's still (maliciously) compliant with the license.
- rlpb44 minutes ago
 Didn't Google work very hard to avoid any GPL in Android, apart from the kernel? What is in there that is GPL?
 - cute_boi10 minutes ago
 I assume Linux.I am very thankful linux is gpl. Because of GPL these tech giants are forced to release source code.
- gowld18 minutes ago
 How slow is "very slow" ? What is "certain source code"? Why is the OP being so coy about describing the problem?Here is the form:<a href="https://source.android.com/opensourcerequest" rel="nofollow">https://source.android.com/opensourcerequest</a>This is interesting:> We might charge you a fee to cover the cost of processing. Your request must be sent according to whichever of the following rules applies:> Within three years of the date you received the product from Google that included the component or binary files that are the subject of your request.That "three years" is the minimum named in the GPLv2: <a href="https://opensource.org/license/gpl-2.0" rel="nofollow">https://opensource.org/license/gpl-2.0</a>
 - HarlequinHair4 minutes ago
 > How slow is "very slow?" The answer can be found two replies after: > Initially, Google would usually provide access to the tarballs within a couple hours. Lately, they're often taking weeks to get back to us. They're the ones who chose to use this archaic system instead of pushing Git tags and it's their responsibility to handle requests promptly.> What is "certain source code"? The OP seems to be GrapheneOS, which heavy patches AOSP. I guess the context is Android source code and its security patches.> Why is the OP being so coy about describing the problem? Not sure what you mean, I think they are explicit enough. I guess it's clear enough for developers how an upstream update should go. If people depend on big projects like AOSP, devs should be prompt in delivering source code, especially when it is mandatory by license.Can you give us more details on how/why you think the OP is being coy?
demibabs2 minutes ago
Can someone explain what this means? Am not familiar with the terminology
jmole51 minutes ago
“In violation of GPL” is a stretch.Can’t imagine Google is making the process of obtaining source code easier on themselves though.Android has always been more source-open than “open source”. The vast majority of community contributions that make it into the codebase are security fixes and small bug fixes.Everything else is essentially all the work of Google and (to some extent) Samsung.
- jsiepkes22 minutes ago
 > Everything else is essentially all the work of Google and (to some extent) Samsung.There is plenty in Android which isn't the work of Google. For starters the Kotlin implementation and the Java implementation (OpenJDK).
- ajross46 minutes ago
 > “In violation of GPL” is a stretch.The originally envisioned distribution method, in fact, was "Send FSF a blank 9-track tape and they'll fill it and mail it back". Nor, obviously, does anything prevent someone who downloads this from Drive from mirroring it on GitHub or wherever.This is arguably bad stewardship of a historically open source project. It's certainly not a license violation.
 - Brian_K_White42 minutes ago
 It's paying a bill in pennies.
 - ajross18 minutes ago
 It's not even that. Downstream projects host their own mirrors already, this is an annoying hoop to jump through for the maintainers (basically suck down a bunch of tarballs for every release, analogous to grabbing stuff from FTP sites back in the day), but not exactly a terrible hardship compared to the really very significant work of maintaining a large project.
spydum52 minutes ago
isn't this just malicious compliance? not clear how this would violate GPLv2?
- osmsucks40 minutes ago
 Yeah, I agree. While this is a terrible move IMHO, from my superficial reading of the GPLv2 it doesn't really constitute a violation: the license imposes that the source be distributed to anyone who asks, potentially even charge a fee to cover its distribution costs, but it doesn't require that development happen in the open.
cute_boi8 minutes ago
I think leadership in Google is getting worst day by day. The main reason to use Android is mostly sideloading and open source and they are trying to sabotage both.
izacus21 minutes ago
Source code of which components is that? It's not very clear from the mastodon thread.