GrapheneOS version 2022080300 released: grapheneos.org/releases#20220.
See the linked release notes for a summary of the improvements over the previous release.
Forum discussion thread:
discuss.grapheneos.org/d/373-graphene
Conversation
Replying to
As always, thanks for all your work 👏
One thing I couldn't find out in the channel: are you planning to update the backup app? Upstream has some important changes (e.g. using davx5 webdav).
1
Only after Android 13, and we don't trust the people who took over the project upstream so we can't simply take their changes unreviewed. In the long term we plan to replace it completely even if that means temporarily losing features.
1
2
Yeah, I heard there were some tensions between the projects.
As an open source developer, I understand how these things happen 😔
As an open source user, otoh, I just want all the shiny things developed anywhere of course 😇
1
In the case of Seedvault, the original dev is an old friend of mine. So if I can be of any help in resolving issues or questions, let me know.
2
The issue is that the original developer made it for GrapheneOS (when it had a different name) and shortly afterwards there was the failed takeover attempt on our project. Things were in very bad shape for over a year and it took a long time just to revive / restore what we had.
1
2
Having a backup/restore app was a low priority at the time. Even now, doing something about it is a low priority.
Despite all the massive advances, we've had to cut back in areas. There's a lot more focus on user-facing features now: sandboxed Google Play, Storage Scopes, etc.
1
1
We've been focused on survival since 2018.
The people who took control of that backup project are far worse than my former business partner. I trust them less. They portray it as something they originally made and use it to cause harm to us. We may remove it with no replacement.
1
1
Every time I see it used in attacks on GrapheneOS, it's another step towards simply removing it with no replacement ready. That may happen just because we do not trust them and they have a history of downplaying, covering up and not fixing security bugs in their projects.
1
1
The person who made that project we're on terrible terms with worked for the company previously associated with our project and the organization they work for now had ties to it and was involved in the events following the failed takeover. I see it as being closely tied together.
Despite not being a hardened OS, they tried to portray it as a successor and filling the same niche and have doubled down on that despite also doubling down on reducing rather than improving security, etc. With all their attacks across platforms, I can't think of a bigger enemy.
1
1
We can't be shipping software from a group of people heavily invested in doing this:
twitter.com/DanielMicay/st
That's not an isolated incident or just one person. It's a group of them, and it's the group of people who took over that project.
Quote Tweet
Several F-Droid developers are involved in repeatedly engaging in bullying, harassment and libel towards me. I've archived a thread with the latest example of it here:
archive.ph/j7qql
Many previous examples including twitter.com/DanielMicay/st. Other devs are involved.
Show this thread
read image description
ALT
1
1
Show replies