Notices by Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave@social.librem.one)

I will go one step further and say that calling #FDroid an "unsafe app" by this standard is dishonest. It seems that some at #Google also agreed, since the older version of that screen was honest: "Blocked by Play Protect" instead of "Unsafe app blocked". Looks like the #GooglePlay team is still focused on protecting their #monopoly, this time using scare tactics. 2/2

This screen that #Google shows on #Android when installing #FDroid really bugs me. It is purely based on the integer value targetSdkVersion, without considering our security model, public audits results, track record over 10+ years, exclusive use of memory safe languages, or even what our code actually does. It is as if #FDroid marked anything that comes from Google as containing ads and trackers. 1/2

@fribbledom @surendrajat the key is providing enough information that a developer can reproduce the issue locally. Granted, that's often difficult. Without reproducing the issue locally, fixing bugs is basically just guesswork. That issue is a good example of not having enough information to reproduce, though people have posted some info.

@fribbledom @surendrajat please file an issue so we can follow up on it: https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroidclient/-/issues

For most bugs, 90% of the work of fixing it must come from the affected person, since it is about describing how to reproduce the bug, and providing follow up info. I rarely see bugs or crashes like this on my own devices since the ones I encounter over the years, I have fixed. We want to fix all the bugs, but we need people to report them, and provide detailed info.