Conversation

Replying to and
That's not how the official F-Droid repository works. Developers don't release their apps through it. The way it works is the F-Droid packagers choose apps to package and are responsible for keeping them updated. They could make their own F-Droid repository to do it themselves.
1
55
The issue with that is F-Droid handles it quite poorly and confuses users since the app releases signed with different signatures are incompatible. Perhaps F-Droid should add an app id prefix when using their own signing keys but they aren't doing that. It's a bit of a mess.
5
22
Replying to and
I don't feel like it's on the path to becoming what's needed. For GrapheneOS, we're going to be making our own app install / update system. One of the apps we'll provide in our repo is F-Droid, but we aren't comfortable bundling it with the OS or giving auto-install privileges.
1
11
It could be blamed on lack of resources, but it's their choice to package such a huge number of apps including many that are unmaintained and/or blatantly insecure. Play Store also has minimum API target level for privacy/security reasons, and F-Droid definitely doesn't do that.
1
10
The reason they finally switched to v2+ signatures is that Android starting enforcing it for apps targeting API 30+ as a security improvement. F-Droid had dozens of apps with v1 signatures and API 30+ which all broke for users on Android 11. This impacted GrapheneOS users a lot.
1
9
Show replies