• rezad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    my hot take: while this is good for users in short term, in long term it just prolongs non-copyleft android OS hold for google.

    my only hope for grapheneos is that they pointed that they may move from android too.

    • Lev@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      That’s the long-term plan, yeah. Moving from Linux entirely actually, as they mentioned a future microkernel project

      • rezad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        as I said in last post, I only see copyleft as a viable alternative. too many dev efforts forked and privatized. android should have been a warning. but many devs just think open source is enough. and they still think getting adapted by big corporation will not change the direction of projects.

        I am personally going in the direction of testing and helping only copyleft projects. so I skipped RedoxOS. even-though I like rust and new microkernel OSes.

        If I am going to give my time to a project (small as it is) I don’t want it to end up like android.

        • Lev@europe.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          I completely agree, and a strong copyleft licence is something that GPLv3 does much better than its predecessor, which is unfortunately why it has not been adopted by the Linux kernel. I foolishly assumed that GrapheneOS, given the values it professes, would be distributed under the GPLv3 licence, but I have now discovered that this is not the case, in a move that I frankly cannot understand. Hope that changes in the near future, but it’s not very likely to happen I guess