upvote

points

by mjg5911 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby grapheneos9 hours ago|
next
[-]
It was initially taking under a business day for them to respond, but our recent requests have often taken weeks for them to get back to us. We want the code for all the Beta releases and are entitled to it.

This is the relevant code for Android 17:

https://gitlab.com/grapheneos/kernel_pixel/-/tree/17-base

https://gitlab.com/grapheneos/kernel_pixel_muzel/-/tree/17-b...

There are other branches there with it for Android 17 QPR1 Beta and Android 17 QPR2 Beta.

Google could save everyone including themselves a lot of hassle by simply publishing it to GitHub. If they don't want to push it to AOSP for weird organizational reasons as part of saying AOSP doesn't support Pixels, fine. Taking weeks or more to get back to us isn't reasonable for one the largest tech companies in the world.

It's also questionable whether what they're providing is truly the preferred form for modification considering the build system is quite unhappy about the lack of Git repositories. They had to provide a repo manifest metadata file to work around part of it.

reply
upvoteby mjg598 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I wholeheartedly agree. Making it more difficult to obtain GPLed source code than it was before is fundamentally a dick move.
reply
upvoteby grapheneos7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It also isn't only them pushing the boundaries of the GPL.

Pixel 9a and earlier were sold as the official Android Open Source Project (AOSP) reference devices. They made a commitment to providing 7 years of updates for the Pixel 8 and later. Android 16 declared Pixels were no longer AOSP reference devices and stopped providing any support for them. From our perspective, Google hasn't fulfilled their update commitment for the Pixel 6 through Pixel 9a. It's fair to say the Pixel 10 and later weren't sold as AOSP reference devices and didn't have any commitment to providing sources as part of the updates, but that isn't the case for the earlier devices.

reply
upvoteby aleph_minus_one11 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
But after one person does this, the source code access is a solved problem.
reply
upvoteby urbnspacecowboy9 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
No it's not, because "one person" has to keep sitting up and begging for access, every time there's a new release, over and over and over and over and over.
reply
upvoteby petre6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Maybe we colld getan AI agent to pester them with forms?
reply
upvoteby voakbasda5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
What consequences do you imagine if they (rightfully) choose to ignore it?
reply
upvoteby mjg5911 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
But nobody has done this, which is why it's a problem for Graphene
reply
upvoteby beanjuiceII10 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Maybe should someone should do it then?
reply
upvoteby gruez10 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Submitting the form isn't too hard, so there's not much to be gained by getting a non-affiliated volunteer to do it. Also if they're not the ones requesting it, it becomes hard to ascertain the authenticity of the links (eg. it doesn't contain a backdoored kernel).
reply
upvoteby mjg5910 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
They are, which is how they know how long it's taking.
reply