Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

F-Droid inclusion? #22

Open
TPS opened this issue Jun 9, 2021 · 3 comments
Open

F-Droid inclusion? #22

TPS opened this issue Jun 9, 2021 · 3 comments

Comments

@TPS
Copy link

TPS commented Jun 9, 2021

@tpcstld Would you support an RFP @ F-Droid? IfF so, I'd happily open 1 up.

@tpcstld
Copy link
Owner

tpcstld commented Jun 9, 2021

I'm very unfamiliar with this. What's the maintaince burden of getting packaged? Is there something that I would need to do in every app update?

@TPS
Copy link
Author

TPS commented Jun 12, 2021

There's quite a lot of info @ @IzzySoft's writeup's linked above (https://android.izzysoft.de/articles/named/fdroid-intro-1) & specifically answers dev questions (including those you posed) in the "For Developers" sections.

@IzzySoft
Copy link

What's the maintaince burden of getting packaged?

Once it's set up, you will hardly notice any "burden".

Is there something that I would need to do in every app update?

Sure – and you will have to do that anyway: increasing versionCode, updating versionName, creating a tag so it's clear which commit marks the update/release.

Apart from that, as @TPS pointed out. The link given goes to part 1, which introduces F-Droid and mostly focuses on end-users. You should read it first, though (or at least "skim over" – it's not that long) as it gives you a general understanding. Then continue to part 2 (linked from there) for "advanced" topics and topics focusing on developers.

TL;DR: it won't be a burden. But you'll gain the audience of users valuing privacy highly and thus avoiding Play Store (and similar places). With a minimal effort to "get in" – which might be as minimal as just approving, let me take a look…

  • license: fine! ✔️
  • releases tagged: Yepp! ✔️
  • tag name matching either versionName or versionCode: Yes ✔️
  • versionName or versionCode being literals: yes, see link in previous bullet-point ✔️
  • library check: oops, 1 offender (GMS) – we'd need a build flavor that comes without (if we know what you need it for, we might also be able to offer an alternative you could use "globally") ❌

A full scan by our bot might have additional details highlighted, but I doubt it will. Apart from the GMS dependency, this looks fine.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants