Android APK build

[Torinde]

Pie in the sky - running Staging on phones/tablets, TVs, etc.

Preferable solution will be a regular Android app APK. It's supported by SDL2. Related X issue.

Alternatives considered: RetroArch (Pure, Core), Termux.

[johnnovak]

Short answer: No.

Detailed answer: Out of scope, won't do, we don't have time & energy, massive complication, etc.
Fork project, start a phone/tablet/etc. version if desired & good luck 😄

Even more detailed answer: Limited applicability for a ton of energy. DOS games are keyboard + mouse (at least the good ones). If someone wants to put in massive effort just to be able to play a few platformers on their phones (badly), it's their call.

[Grounded0]

We definitely don't view any Android or Libretro core forks negatively since we're not doing them.

[Torinde]

What's the situation with this? Are those contact attempts described somewhere?

• Magic Dosbox (Play Store) - GPL violator: modified GPL2 sources not public and does not respond to requests

I see this:

Any user who has obtained a copy of Magic DOSBox from Google Play Store can email us and we’ll provide the source code(in next few business days). We dont support pirated downloads out of google play in any way. Please provide your trackable order number to the email for the donated version or any proof that free version was downloaded from google play.

Is this how GPL works? Or they should publish the code publicly without such "ask and you shall receive" step?

[Torinde]

OK, and what does it mean "does not respond to requests"?
a) does not respond to request to publish publicly the code
b) does not respond to request by "Any user who has obtained a copy of Magic DOSBox from Google Play Store" to get the code

If a), but not b), then I would find it strange that no user has requested and got the code and then published it/created a fork/etc.

[johnnovak]

Technically, I think you are free to provide the sources on 2 million postage stamps or something sent via mail on request only, and you're still complying with the GPL 😆 Plus I think you can ask money to cover the printing and shipping fees, etc. So yeah, there are many ways around it to be really difficult if you want to 😆

Or simply send the sources with zero documentation, yeah.

[dreamer]

Is this how GPL works? Or they should publish the code publicly without such "ask and you shall receive" step?

Yes, this is how GPL works. You are obliged to send source code on request from users that you distributed/sold the project to. And you are obliged to do it only on request, you don't need to publish it publically. And yes, that's how some companies use GPL and it's perfectly OK.

However, in practice it's much easier to just publish source code and avoid handling user requests. It's just easier and in >99.99% cases how GPL source code is distributed.

Technically, I think you are free to provide the sources on 2 million postage stamp (...)

Nope, that would not be right - GPL is still legal license text, not a "gotcha" script ; obfuscating code this way would count as license violation. Same if code was distributed but users would be not allowed to build it (e.g. because of some proprietary tools).

GPL violator: modified GPL2 sources not public and does not respond to requests

I did write this and yeah, Magic Dosbox is still license violator. If they distributed only paid version then the way they operate would be obtuse but legal. But they DO distribute Magic Dosbox Lite, which is free-to-use - therefore the source code should be freely available. BTW, in the past (long time ago) I did send a request for their source code for Lite version and was ignored.

[dreamer]

Are those contact attempts described somewhere?

I just checked and I still have that mail in my "Sent" dir I sent it in September 2020 to magicbox@imejl.sk (this email used to be somewhere on their page, now I cannot find any email address there), with the "proof" of using Lite version (screenshots). They never responded.

[FeralChild64]

@dreamer Some ideas:

1. Report them to Google, https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3110420?sjid=11618543117085943870-EU
2. Report them to FSF, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html