Guys is everyone accepting a non-free license on their dev tools to build their FLOSS android apps?
Replicant was going out of their way to ship a libre SDK before their 6.0 but they stopped and started people at Debian's packages.
But Debian Wiki says you have to accept the non-free License Agreement to use the tools https://wiki.debian.org/AndroidTools/IntroBuildingApps
Background on the weird Android SDK licensing shenanigans here: http://blogs.fsfe.org/torsten.grote/2013/01/03/android-sdk-is-now-proprietary-replicant-to-the-rescue/
This issue has strongly demotivated me from bothering with Native Android. I've been watching alternatives eagerly: languages or frameworks that help one bypass the Android SDK. Current favourite might end up being Löve2d with the newish "Gooi" layout engine..
I don't know how transitivity works here, tbh. If I use the terminal on my phone through the built-in terminal app, probablybthat was compiled by the SDK, so am I bound by the SDK terms, then?
Is the @fdroidorg project mission to distribute AGPL software on Android undermined by this, for example? I don't know, but my feeling is that at a certain distance, I don't inherit the terms. Maybe cases like Löve are too close? Don't know?
Basically all parts used by #fdroid should actually be free software, googles tries to hide that well though. This blog post elaborates on this: http://code.paulk.fr/article0008/what-s-up-with-the-android-sdk
I say *should*, because the situation is constantly evolving and while we try our best to keep on top of any new SDK parts and licenses this is still on a best effort basis.
The situation is definitely not ideal. 😕
@satchmoz "You may not use this SDK to develop applications for other platforms (including non-compatible implementations of Android) or to develop another SDK"
Rather than trying to band-aid Android (which is a honorable effort of course) we should replace it. Not like we don't have tons of good software in GNU/Linux, we just cannot run it on mobile and it bums me