Slashdot Mirror
Android Source Code Gone For Good?
First time accepted submitter vyrus128 writes "Many people were upset at the revelation, reported here in May, that the Honeycomb version of Android would not be open sourced. But Google promised that the next version, Ice Cream Sandwich, would have full source available. Now that ICS is out, though, the source is nowhere in sight. In the thread, Android's Jean-Baptiste Queru offers the following, as to the question of whether source will ever be made available: 'At the moment I don't have anything to say on that subject.'"
http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a?pli=1
---- GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
It's your God-given right as an American. Sue for the source! Where's RMS?
Only Ice Cream Sandwich is up in the air, not all Android source code.
The title implies that it was all taken down, which is simply not true.
Wait, so the fact that the OS was announced 24 hours ago, its not been released on any phone/device/etc yet and people are STILL whining that the source is not released?! I want their time machine!
This is a dumb news story. History has shown that the source release hits the AOSP shortly after the update is pushed to phones (presumably to protect against any major flaws before it is rolled out to devs).
SDK has been released, SDK Roms should be out soon and by December ICS source should be under heavy development for CM 8 and other roms if history is any indicator.
Google reported on the live stream last night plans to put the ICS source up, something they said they had no plans to do with Honeycomb.
AnimePapers.org: Anime Wallpapers Handled With Care
There is probably a battle between lawyers and engineers going on within the walls about whether to release the sources or not. Give the engineers some time before you start bashing them, and instead give them more reasons to use as ammunition against the lawyers.
Chill out, guys, it's been exactly a day since this all released. They said it will be released, give them time. If we don't have it within a month, THEN worry. ...How long does it usually take them to release the source code?
So on one mailing list, one Google engineer who does not have authority on the policy of releasing full source said "no comment", then the sky is falling?
> "Now that ICS is out" Wow. What has happened to Slashdot? ICS is not out. The first device, the Galaxy Nexus, doesn't get released until next month. And Google did announce ASOP would be released once it is released to the first ICS devices. Basically, everything posted was incorrect. Nice try though
It took a solid week after Eclair started rolling out to phones before they released the source for Eclair.
Hold ya horses
http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/10/19/android-engineer-ice-cream-sandwich-aosp-source-code-will-be-released-but-not-before-galaxy-nexus-goes-on-sale/
Dan Morrill
Oct 20, 4:29 am
Hi!
As you know, like many other projects the Android Open-Source Project was
affected by the recent kernel.org downtime. So, we’re pleased to let you
know that the Gingerbread source code is now available again, and AOSP git
servers are back online.
Even before the kernel.org downtime, it was clear that AOSP was sometimes
taxing kernel.org’s git infrastructure. When we did the Gingerbread source
release, for example, load due to AOSP made part of kernel.org unusable for
several days. This isn’t fair to kernel.org’s staff or the community, so for
some time we’ve been preparing our own git hosting on Google servers.
We were finishing up just as kernel.org experienced their downtime, so the
Gingerbread source is now available on Google’s servers. Accordingly, the
git URLs have changed.
Here are the instructions to access the new git servers:
- You need to get the latest version of the repo tool:
curl https://dl-ssl.google.com/dl/googlesource/git-repo/repo > ~/bin/repo
- You need to initialize a new repository:
repo init -u https://android.googlesource.com/platform/manifest -b
android-2.3.7_r1
- The full instructions are at
http://source.android.com/source/downloading.html
There are a few limitations to be aware of:
- Our priority has been getting the main source code mirrors back online,
so for the moment gitweb source browsing and Gerrit Code Review are still
unavailable.
- We are now working on bringing AOSP’s Gerrit Code Review site back up,
and hope to be able to say something here soon.
- It might be a little while longer before gitweb comes back,
unfortunately, since Gerrit Code Review is the next priority.
- To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.
- As these new servers are, well, new, there may be hiccups if we
encounter unexpected issues. However we’re keeping a close eye on them and
will respond to any issues as quickly as possible.
Finally, we’d like to send a huge “thank-you” to the kernel.org community
and Oregon State University Open-Source Lab staff. They’ve done an
incredible job hosting the AOSP source code mirror and Gerrit Code Review
for nearly 3 years. Without them, it’s safe to say that AOSP would not be
where we are today.
Thanks, and happy coding!
- Dan
"Consider how lucky you are that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far
This is FUD based on nothing. Google has said for quite some time that Gingerbread was available, that Honeycomb would be closed and only suited for tablets and that Ice Cream Sandwich would have the source available once it was released. Google was true to their word and everything for 2.x is available and 3.x is closed. The post linked to in the main article is the sources they are required to release (GPL) now that the Ice Cream Sandwich SDK is available. It should be noted that Ice Cream Sandwich itself as an OS has not been released and is not available on any shipping product. They've already said "We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices." It's not available on devices yet.
Portable versions of Firefox, GIMP, LibreOffice, etc
No, this is precisely the same sort of criticism that gets leveled against any company which has a history of adopting open-source code without obeying open-source licenses, which justifies a default position of "I'll see it when I believe it" for Google making promises to release code. Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?
"move along, nothing to see here (God, been awhile since I last saw that good old phrase here)"
You must have been gone for awhile. Welcome back
Google has said all along: "We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices."
What's with all the Android-baiting on Slashdot lately? Did Microsoft buy some more advertising?
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Why should they release the source for an OS that isn't even out in the wild yet? They've already said that the source will be released once the Galaxy Nexus is in stores (probably so that the Nexus is actually the first phone running 4.0. I'm there will be plenty of custom ROMs for other phones/tablets within days of the ICS source being released)
CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
I welcome that kind of pressure to keep Google honest. Something has to push back against the many pressures to keep Google dishonest, and to keep Android source unavailable. Pressure from the large geek community is good.
--
make install -not war
Here's a HINT: Check the LICENSE on Android. They don't HAVE a legal requirement for jack on the platform itself. Only the Linux kernel and things like it- which everyone seems to be complying on. Android itself is under the Apache License , which has no requirements for redistribution of the source on publication like the LGPL and GPL happen to have.
It's damned FUD you and others are spreading here. Give it a rest, will you?
So, essentially, this "story" is nothing more than I-Hate-Google-The-Sky-Is-Falling conspiracy speculation nonsense.
Is Slashdot pandering for page-views?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?
I haven't followed Google's behavior with the Android source code that closely, but what legal requirement are you talking about? I thought Android was Apache licensed?
What legal requirement? Google doesn't have to release any of the Android source code because they chose the Apache license. The parts of Android under GPL like the kernel have been released. Also Google has a better track record of releasing source code than most companies so I think they have earned a bit of slack in this situation.
Fear mongering headlines followed by outright lies in the summaries, and people eat it up...
What's with all the Android-baiting on Slashdot lately? Did Microsoft buy some more advertising?
Why is it anti-Android sentiments are assumed to be the product of Microsoft? They make more money from Android than they do from WP7 so if anything the anti-Android stuff is likely to come from someone like Apple.
So sue if you're so sure. But articles such as this are pure FUD, there is nothing to indicate that they wont release the source code to ICS.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Why do I even come here anymore?!
I ask myself that same question rather frequently. And then I come here again. And I write things.
Less often since I've been using G+ though.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
This is FUD based on nothing. Google has said for quite some time that Gingerbread was available, that Honeycomb would be closed and only suited for tablets and that Ice Cream Sandwich would have the source available once it was released. Google was true to their word and everything for 2.x is available and 3.x is closed. The post linked to in the main article is the sources they are required to release (GPL) now that the Ice Cream Sandwich SDK is available. It should be noted that Ice Cream Sandwich itself as an OS has not been released and is not available on any shipping product. They've already said "We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices." It's not available on devices yet.
So why are we all still here?
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?
I haven't followed Google's behavior with the Android source code that closely, but what legal requirement are you talking about? I thought Android was Apache licensed?
Regardless of Android's license, there is no legal requirement for Google to release any code except portions to which they do not hold the copyright and are licensed (to Google) under viral conditions (i.e. GPL). Google's own code (as long as it is not classified as a derivative of someone else's work under the GPL), even if it was released under the GPL (or any open source license) in the past, does not have to be provided freely because Google is the copyright holder and therefore is not subject to the license as if they were a licensee.
As far as I'm aware, Google is adhering to any licensing terms that they are subject to. They also open source some of their own code, as well. Non-story.
This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
I was about to suggest that you were incorrect and that /. reported on Google saying that 3.1 would merge the two, but in re-reading the linked article from back then, it appears that you're correct. They always said that ICS would merge the two together. Oh well, guess I shot down myself on that point. Yay for facts prevailing, regardless of my memory.
As for the source code commentary, I think it's ethically dissonant (read: hypocritical) for a company claiming that their OS is "open" to close the source for an extended period of time, even if they do later open it back up. I have no problems with closed source, but I do have problems with companies claiming one thing and delivering another (or nothing, in this case). I especially have issues with it since Andy Rubin, when Android was criticized in a public earnings call by Steve Jobs for its claims regarding openness, responded by Tweeting:
the definition of open: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make”
And then only 4 months later he failed to deliver on his own idea of open for anyone wanting to use Honeycomb. At the very least, that's a disappointment. I don't see how anyone can see it otherwise. That they kept their word and are releasing the source for ICS is good, of course, but it's good in the same sort of way that your employer keeping their promise to pay you this month after skipping last month is a good thing. But it is good, and I'm glad to see that they're doing it.
Whether or not what they did is legal is a matter best left to lawyers, and I have no opinion on that subject.
You meant Honeycomb, I think, not Gingerbread. Also, the GPL parts of Honeycomb were released (including the kernel and so on), it was the Apache Licensed parts they kept closed.
Not taking a position one way or another on if it was good or bad, just clarifying.
Excuse me, but Google also said that Android was truly open,and even made fun of Apple about that in public.
Then 3 month later they released HoneyComb and we've never seen the source, and we'll never see it in fact.
The fact is that Google will or will not release Android source (the non-GPL parts) whenever they feel like it, if they feel like it, and will stop releasing whenever they feel like it, if they feel like it. And that their "word" is not worth very much either.
They will most likely release ICS source code because it would be rather bad for their marketing if they did not. But they'll probably try to close it again, whenever they decide the competition is too high (tablets were a whole "new" market back then and they probably had fear that WebOS/BB/etc could get Android's share here. Now it's pretty clear that its Android/iOS and all the rest is dead.)
Quoting JBQ's post from today: "yes, that means ICS will be coming to AOSP".
https://plus.google.com/112218872649456413744/posts/HB5qQHeNKBQ
Is Slashdot pandering for page-views?
Does a bear shit on the pope?
(Probably not but let's run with it as a headline)
Where's my mod points when I want 'em.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Here is the latest article http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20111019223707715
"The trial date in Oracle v. Google, previously set for October 31, has been vacated. No new date has been set. "
So, my guess is that Google awaits the outcome for this trial.
Google has said for quite some time that Gingerbread was available, that Honeycomb would be closed and only suited for tablets and that Ice Cream Sandwich would have the source available once it was released. Google was true to their word and everything for 2.x is available and 3.x is closed. The post linked to in the main article is the sources they are required to release (GPL) now that the Ice Cream Sandwich SDK is available. It should be noted that Ice Cream Sandwich itself as an OS has not been released and is not available on any shipping product. They've already said "We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once itâ(TM)s available on devices." It's not available on devices yet.
Not disputing the FUD.
But... Android is "open source" on the same terms Solaris is "open source" now? You have to laugh at this, the most lauded example of Linux and Open Source making it mainstream.
...they released HoneyComb and we've never seen the source, and we'll never see it in fact.
I almost hate to defend them on this point, frustrated as I am about the fact that they haven't released Honeycomb (I understand why, but it sets a really bad precedent). Saying that we'll never see it is just wrong, though. They give full access to their version control, so when they open up ICS (and I have no reason yet to believe that they won't) you'll get to see every change made from Gingerbread to now.
A lot of things (like politics, for instance) would be better if we called people on their bullshit - constantly - rather than let them get away with it.
Thankfully we finally have people leveraging the power of the Internet and aggregating data with things like Politifact and the Obameter, so the populous can be more informed if they want to be more informed. Sadly, a lot of them still don't seem to care.
I do feel a fair bit of hope that there are a lot of younger people who try to be more connected to the world, though. They read the news (and not just Fox's "UHMERICUH FUCK YEAH" shows), they protest, they petition... maybe idealism is something that only the young are good at.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
- To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’ branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.
My karma's still excellent, where'd that checkbox go? Because crap articles like this make me want to check it. I mean, maybe they will, maybe they won't. But there seems to be little basis to say they won't from the oh-so-thin facts in TFS.
I thought it odd I saw this thread on Slashdot after I'd read this article:
http://www.zdnetasia.com/android-4-0-to-be-open-source-in-coming-weeks-62302580.htm
"Rubin said Ice Cream Sandwich will be open source "in a couple of weeks" when Samsung's Galaxy Nexus ships and manufacturers will be free to push the update to their current range of devices. Going open source means manufacturers will be able to put Android 4.0 into their own devices and cut their own ROMs for existing products."
Sorry but it's not just a word. It has power that can't be willed away. If you use it like that you're asking for trouble, regardless of your intention. I find it offensive (as would most other residents of the United States, I'd guess), particularly when used the way you just used it. You can't make that reality go away by saying "get over it, people".
The whole "Don't Be Evil" thing has never been about actions or behaviour. It has always been about impression. The full line should read: Don't be perceived as evil.
Never eat more than you can lift -- Miss Piggy
I knew it will happen :) Soon hard-core linux fans will ban android phones and declare them unclean and all android users as infidels, LOL.
Why is it anti-Android sentiments are assumed to be the product of Microsoft?
You notice nobody at Slashdot is discussing the OS itself?
Despite other commentators recognizing that a new release of the most popular smartphone OS in the world is a big event, and that the new version is a significant improvement, all the discussion here is about what Microsoft has said about it, or more lame versions of the long-running trolling over source code.
Meanwhile, this is what the real world is saying:
"Android ICS offers a massive array of improvements over its predecessors bringing the best of both Gingerbread and Honeycomb while providing a raft of new innovations."
http://www.techradar.com/news/mobile-computing/android-4-0-ice-cream-sandwich-everything-you-need-to-know-954464
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
The Honeycomb code was open to tablet manufacturers and ASUS actually released.
News about the Kettle Open Source project: on my blog
(and for the love of God, get over the word, it is a word like other words, your hypersensitivity does not make it special, it really doesn't have much to do with skin color but with content of character, just for once stop knee-jerking and realize it)
"Nigger" comes from the Spanish "Negre", which literally means "black". So it has ONLY to do with color.
You using that word and then explaining why your use of that word isn't meant to discriminate means you perfectly well understand that current society will interpret it as discriminatory.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
No, because even if the source to the application framework isn't available, you can still (a) install your own applications on top of it without google's permission and (b) install your own kernel under it.
I welcome that kind of pressure to keep Slashdot honest. Pressure from the large geek community is good.
As a counter point. In Estonian language the word neeger means a polite version of african origin or a person with black skin color etc. It has absolutely no context here because there never was any involvement in slave labor etc and the population of black coloured people here is rather slim (order of 100 or less in the whole country), mostly due to the climate. However if you take the other words one can use i.e. must mees (black person) etc, those have an undertone of rudeness to them.
Same in Portuguese, which was the language where the words supposedly came from (since "we" were the first Europeans to buy African slaves).
Dilbert RSS feed
Actually, the phone version of Android, 2.X, is still Open Source. Only the tablet version (3.X) and ICS, which isn't available in any product are closed.
Dilbert RSS feed
You don't get it, if you are male and I tell you "Stop being such a fucking cunt" then it's an insult to you that you're acting like a woman and an implied insult that women are cunts. Those meanings aren't separate, they're the basis of the whole insult. Here's a derogatory term for a whole group and you're just as bad as them. Any way you use it amounts to "You're as bad as being a black person and being a black person is very bad." Naturally black people would object to that even if they're not the direct target of the statement.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
1) No one does that. 2) It is open. CyanogenMod makes Gingerbread available to an awful lot of devices with source and everything. It's the latest code currently available on Android phones, in actual fact.
I hope that when you grow up, you become more honest. Otherwise, you'll be unsuitable for politics.
Yes. Every time I go there I lose a couple of IQ points. Oh shii~
If you have more information about that, I'd like to see it. Everything I can find says they released the kernel, which is no more than they (all) were obligated to under the GPL.
I'd never taken cunt to mean woman, despite the obvious physiological link. To me a cunt is just a person who acts like a cunt. Which is similar to a dick or an asshole.
which is totally what she said
Words evolve over time into different shaded meanings. You do realize that dictionaries dont define a word, USAGE does. A dictionary is the CURRENT usages for words, subject to change.
Good-bye
You mean, like every other open-source project in the world? I've yet to see a Free Software license that warrants access to all possible future releases. The closest thing to that is the KDE Free Qt Foundation's promised right to relicense QT in case it ever gets closed, and that's only up until the last version already published under the free Q Public License.
So far Google has given a very good reason why they don't want the one-shot temporary Honeycomb source to be exposed to the world, that it was an experiment designed to be obsoleted.
And they already have promised a date when the Icecream source will be released. I myself will reserve my judgement on the quality of their word until that date.
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
the real reason is this: to keep small, "unlicensed" tablet and phone manufacturers from making devices with anything more fresh than 2.3. in other words it's just plain favoritism towards manufacturers who license googles stuff and pay google. a lot of googlers don't really want to say this aloud and keep promising the next version will be different story.
I mean, it would be sweet to have honeycomb or ics versions of http://www.android-x86.org/. for development, it boots up in virtual box much faster than the arm emulating shit-emulators that ship with the sdk.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
And this is the view that keeps the word's power. Contrast with gay. The homosexual community embraced the various slurs that people used against them. It's now hard to find a word to describe a homosexual that is intrinsically insulting - only the attitude of the speaker matters, as it should be. In contrast, people get hyper-defensive about people saying 'nigger', giving it a taboo status.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Yes, and in USAGE this word is a derogatory term.
As I stated before, saying you use a certain word with a different meaning than recognized by current society does not make it so.
The meaning of words is determined by the masses (those you want to understand what you're saying), not the individual.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
if they change their opinion hence forth.
After all the are in it to make money, not to give you an open source orgasm.
Besides its early days yet, and that guy could just be a typical American idiot who can't string two coherent sentences together.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Stop with the shitty speculation.
I saw Steve at the BigAndroidBBQ here in Austin, TX, earlier this month, and had a chance to speak with him in person, one on one. I also professionally work with one of the members of TeamDouche.
While Steve did say that they currently had no info on when/if they would release ICS , CM development is alive and well.
There's a difference between keeping up pressure on companies to do the right thing (good) and blatant overreactions that harm the company's image without justification (bad). Claiming that the fact that the source isn't available the second the OS is released, despite assurances from the company that it would be open source and nothing official to the contrary, somehow means the end of all open source from said company forever is just insanity level overreaction. Let's give them a chance to do the right thing before we all don the Guy Fawkes masks and march on Google HQ.
+1 flamebait. salute. it's the truth, but anyway ;)
On second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.
Am I missing your point? The source code for Gingerbread is, and has been, available. Sure.
The article is talking about Ice Cream Sandwich.
You know, every time I start to actually believe the people who try to paint Stallman as a paranoid extremist, somebody goes and proves him right like this.
Its GPL v3 for me from now on.
The reality is much different, and now with the lack of real availability and transparency with the source code the differences between Android and other phones is smaller. The development has never been an open source model. Features are still defined by what benefits Google and the carriers.
It is a tautology that Google has no moral obligations to do anything. This is bussiness and saying google has a moral obligation to release code is like say those who owe mortgages have a moral obligation to pay. They don't. Contracts are not covenants. But we do expect people to make at least a small effort to do what they say they are going to do, and in this case Google made a big hullabaloo about Android being open source, and used in marketing copy among other things. So if this is FUD, it is FUD created and promulgated by Google.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Do not feed the trolls!
But CyanogenMod needs Honeycomb or ICS to provide a good experience on tablets. Now it appears that may never happen.
Android source releases in the past have NEVER been provided on announcement day.
As you've pointed out, it usually happens after a device with the new version is released, and don't expect it on device launch day either - usually it takes a couple of weeks, but it's rarely withheld longer than that (Honeycomb being the exception, an exception which Google explicitly stated was an explanation and why it was an exception.)
Complicating the issue is the fact that the AOSP repos have traditionally been hosted on kernel.org - which is STILL at least partially hosed. As the kernel.org saga goes forwards, more and more people that were hoping for it to return quickly have migrated - see Linus moving to github, and as of 2-3 weeks ago, the AOSP tress finally got mirrored over to github, but I'm not sure if that was an official move. (It was impossible to sync a full Cyanogenmod tree from scratch for at least a month due to the fact that the components of Android CM doesn't modify get synced directly from the original repos.)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Don't /. editors check stories for troll submissions these days?
Apparently not, given the amount of articles I stories I have reading recently where the first few comments for each article all point out lacking information/source/validity or that it is just plain fud (4 so far today!).
I personally suspect /. editing has been handed over to a redesigned spam filter.
Wow! the incomprehensibility of that first sentence hurts. It really does.
Am I missing your point? The source code for Gingerbread is, and has been, available. Sure.
The article is talking about Ice Cream Sandwich.
Yes, because you didn't read the full post. It wasn't even that long, but here's the relevant part: We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.
Note that Google has done nothing of the sort - anything that's GPL has been released in full compliance.
People seem to forget that the majority of Android userland is Apache-licensed.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
To be fair, that did require scrolling. I mean, come on. Reading?
Now it appears that may never happen.
Says who?
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
I'm not sure if HC source is guaranteed when that happens, as it isn't their full internal source repo that's being made public.
However, I wouldn't be surprised if Google does this out of goodwill, especially considering that their reasoning for withholding the source will no longer be valid.
In fact, I think at one point I saw Google claim that not only would ICS source be released, but Honeycomb source would be released - but NOT until after ICS source went live.
Google has stated many times, over and over again, why HC sources were withheld.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Let's start with the lie in the summary.
"Now that ICS is out, though, the source is nowhere in sight. "
ICS isn't out. It has been shown but it is not out.
And we have this statement " - To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices. "
Source: http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a?pli=1
In other words this is all click bait and the summary should be appended.
The source will be released when the phones are released aka when the program is distributed the source code will be released.
Wow now Slashdot is now Trolling.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Perhaps you missed the part where Google has released the few GPL components of ICS, most importantly Linux. What they have not released are the Apache-licensed components which have absolutely nothing to do with kernel.org.
No, this is precisely the same sort of criticism that gets leveled against any company which has a history of adopting open-source code without obeying open-source licenses, which justifies a default position of "I'll see it when I believe it" for Google making promises to release code.
Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?
The issue is not whether Google is complying with the law or the letter of any license. They have been very careful to avoid any such mistake. The issue is whether they are using the all too common strategy of getting a lot people to use their project by releasing it as Free and Open Source Software and then reverse direction when they have enough people depending on them. That's a bait and switch strategy far worse than how the likes of Apple and Microsoft operate. At least with them, you know you're getting proprietary software from the beginning.
Is Slashdot just trying to generate ad impressions at the cost of misinforming people?
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
What the hell?
What ICS having improvements over its predecessors have to do with the fact that its source code isn't available? One of the big selling points of Android was supposed to be its openness, and that was often trumpeted on Slashdot.
Now that Google has gone back on that, suddenly, it's not a news story, and because the "real world" (TechRadar?) isn't talking about the lack of source code availability, that means it's not a story?
Plenty of other tech media outlets have covered this issue, particularly Ars Technica. Just because you're a big Google fan and don't want to see any criticism of them or their products doesn't mean that it shouldn't be discussed. That is, unless you think it's okay for Google to exploit the positive feelings associated with the term "open" only to go back on that.
As for being most popular smartphone OS in the world, you may want to try counting tablets and music players in your figures to see what is actually the most popular mobile OS in the world. Hint--its an OS as closed source as Android currently is.
Sure, keep the pressure up, cant hurt much. But with Apple going lawsuit-happy and their ultimate target is clearly Android, Google has to be thinking that sharing anything has a bigger downside risk, both in terms of potential liability and in exposing planned features. Google had to reconsider their stance because the landscape has become hostile in the last 12 months, and the blame falls squarely on Apple (and Microsoft and Oracle and their DOJ lackeys) for aggressively trying to kill off a competitor for being successful. If I were Google I'd be adopting a siege mentality too.
I dont really care about them releasing source. As a consumer I'm a lot more interested in having a viable alternative to iPad in the marketplace, and as a developer Im a lot more interested in having better tablet support in Ubuntu. Lack of Android source code hasnt hindered me in any way from developing Android apps, while lack of drivers and decent libraries for Ubuntu tablets *has*.
"What's with all the Android-baiting on Slashdot lately?"
What is with the blind faith in Google? They are a for-profit corporation, so obviously they aren't going to be open. They spent two years' profit on Moto Mobility, so of course they are going to give them preferential treatment. From the Oracle lawsuit discovery:
"If we gave [Android] away, how do we ensure we get benefit from it? [We] create policies that allow us to drive the standard,"
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
At least *one* of us has to pretend like we believe this is a credible story.
I've noticed that. They just don't want you to root your phone anymore and get rid of all of the carriers crapware. I can see with an unlimited plan charging for tethering but for a plan limited to 2 gig you gotta pay extra for that. Data is data. Does anyone think this is not dishonest?
I would say that this is happening because Google is coming under pressure from the carriers for this sort of thing. Android 4.0 will probably be hard to root.
I think you are right. CyanogenMod just isn't fast enough and maybe you don't have enough screen for the keyboard to work properly on these older Froyo devices.
I'm really not that worried about this possibility, simply because Google would be fools to not release the code and they know it. They've benefited greatly from contributions to projects like Cyanogen, and the collective will of the Internet tends to come up with a lot of good ideas for them to integrate back into the official distribution.
I suppose it's possible that they *could* just decide "oh, we'll let them keep playing with Gingerbread and just steal any good ideas we see," but I think they know that's short-sighted and will cost them a lot more than good will.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
Thanks for being an example of an Apple fanboy bashing Google. Double-bonus for still having that not-even-wrong sig about Google's openness.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
1) No one does that. [bash on about how Android is open and other phone OSes are closed, thus making Android superior]
AHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
Oh wait, you were serious, let me laugh even harder.
What website are you reading?!
I really hope all this is a troll because my entire reason for using Android is the very openness of the platform. If Google is no longer going to keep their platform open source, I no longer have a compelling reason to continue using Android.
Repeatedly? They said they wouldn't release Honeycomb's source because it was shit. What other instance do you have about them 'going back on their word' about Android's openness? And on top of that, even if they *did* close the source forever, how is that any different than your beloved Apple?
You're going to be eating a lot of crow when ICS hits source code repositories. Somehow I doubt you'll ever offer up a mea culpa over it and instead find something else to bitch about.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
No. We don't.
Not really. There's a whole subreddit about Android full of helpful people. Slashdot has become a backwater of curmudgeons and the number and quality of comments is really disappointing. I have such great memories of Slashdot but after a bit of a hiatus I realized why I don't visit as often.
As for being most popular smartphone OS in the world, you may want to try counting tablets and music players in your figures to see what is actually the most popular mobile OS in the world. Hint--its an OS as closed source as Android currently is.
You need to move the goalposts a bit slower than that, or it's painfully obvious.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
I think "faggot" is probably the most insulting word I know to describe pillow-biters and ass-bandits.
People say "faggot" used to mean "a bundle of sticks", but I don't think that applies because bundles of stick don't suck each other off.
Android is not "Open Source", should not even pretend to be, and people should not think of it that way. It is "Open Sauce". You can take it, put your favorite flavor on it, massage it as you will, but you cannot "add" or rather "contribute" anything to Android.
There is a total NIH (not invented here) attitude by the Android team and nothing from the outside will realistically be included. It does not operate like any other real Open Source community.
Google has their controllers and determiners, and only they get to do any of the actual determination.
So once again, it is "Open Sauce"
Right, and they RELEASED all the source code that was GPLed as well as all source that was directly linked to it. They did this for Honeycomb. They've ALREADY done this for Ice Cream Sandwich. And they've released the FULL source (GPL, Apache, BSD, etc bits) for Gingerbread, as they will for ICS once phones are released.
Portable versions of Firefox, GIMP, LibreOffice, etc
Call me deprived, but I did not have the good fortune to grow up in Glorious Free Progressive Estonia. Instead, I grew up in a place where one commonly saw signs reading, "Coloured Only" and "White Only", and where the word "nigger" carried (and continues to carry to this day) the connotation of "second-class" (at best), or even "property".
The signs are long gone (thank goodness), but you just try going to the US and calling the first black person you see "nigger". I guarantee a most interesting result. (Protip: Make sure your health insurance is up date first. You might need it.)
There's your "context", moron.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Well he got married in 1991 and he had no Apple stock from the time he got fired to the time of Apple's acquisition of/merger with NeXT in 1997. And he probably has all his Apple and Disney stock in a holding company like how Bill Gate has Cascade Investments LLC.