[conspire] Android app ecosystem

[Rick Moen]

Re-researching those APK sources, to verify that they actually at least
claim to check the licence for each entry:  On reflection, I remembered
the lesson that major lists often completely fail to try [**COUGH***
SourceForge ***COUGH***  [1] ].

> https://f-droid.org/  
>   F-Droid is an installable catalogue of FOSS (Free and Open Source
>   Software) applications for the Android platform. The client makes it
>   easy to browse, install, and keep track of updates on your device.

Yes!  Appears to do it right.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_free_and_open-source_Android_applications
>   This is an incomplete list of notable applications (apps) that run on
>   the Android platform that meet guidelines for free software and
>   open-source software. For a more extensive list of apps, see the
>   External links section below.

Yes.

> http://www.aopensource.com/
>   The Android Open Source ressources and software database.

Yes.

> https://prism-break.org/en/categories/android/

Yes.  Site does link to proprietary Android codebases along with open 
source ones, but is quite clear about which is which, and has a variety
of other useful content.

> http://droid-break.info/
>   Droid-Break is a list of free and open source Android apps inspired by
>   Prism-Break. Our purpose is to show you high quality alternatives to the
>   big proprietary solutions.

Yes.

> https://github.com/pcqpcq/open-source-android-apps
>   This is a collection of Android Apps which are open source.
>   I believe that we can find something interesting and gain helpful skills
>   from an open source app.

Yes.

> https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-of-the-best-open-source-Android-apps

Sort of, but not really.  Quora being a crowdsourced Q&A site, this item
has a motley collection of answers from various people, some of whom get
it completely wrong and suggest proprietary Android apps, and
essentially no answer specifies licences for items suggested -- which
highlights why this is important.  It's not that you need to know that 
app [FOO] is under Apache License; it's that absence of attention to the 
question makes inclusion of inappropriate entries very likely.

Many of the answers are well worth reading anyway.

> https://fossdroid.com/
>   Free and open source Android apps

Yes.  Slick site, BTW.

> https://opensource.com/life/15/1/going-open-source-android-f-droid
>   [Article about F-Droid.]
 
(Not applicable, as it's just an article.)


All of the following additional entries adequately note licensing except
as noted:



http://www.mobilegap.net/#open-sourced-mobile-applications-for-android-mobile-platform
   Open sourced mobile applications for Android mobile platform
   [RM: small list]

http://opensourceandroidapps.com/
   Free and open-source software is good for you and good for the world.
   These are the best open source Android apps that we know of.
   [Again, small list.  Licensing information missing:  All the apps
   turned out to be open source, but it's left for the reader to find
   the licensing details for each.]

https://alternativeto.net/platform/android/?license=opensource
   AlternativeTo is a free service that helps you find better
   alternatives to the products you love and hate.
   [RM:  Being crowdsourced, site is vulnerable to goofy errors, 
   but still useful.  And it completely _fails_ on licence 
   information, which can nonetheless often be gotten easily on
   linked sites.]

https://code.google.com/archive/p/apps-for-android/
   A collection of useful, open source applications that demonstrate
   basic features of the Android platform.
   [RM:  Small, but nice.]

http://playboard.me/android/channels/52f279c34dc454c54a7c511f
   apps found from xda-develpers.com , aopensource.com, Wikipedia,
   droidbreak.neocities.org , quora.com and some blogs.....and finally
   curated by me :)  [Abhimanyu Agrawal]
   [RM: He doesn't cite licence information, but links only to 
   repos that carry only open source code.]





[1] When I worked at VA Linux Systems, I examined all SourceForge
projects buildable for PalmOS, and kept finding ones where the claimed 
licensing was wrong, or code was in obvious violation of a third party's 
copyrights, or where submitter's choosing licence category 'Other'
concealed an outright proprietary licence, and brought my list of these
problems to the managers in charge of SourceForge.net.  They advised
that all licensing and copyright information was self-reported by the 
uploaders and offered 'as is', and that VA Linux Systems, Inc. would 
be taking no measures to investigate or correct errors or misstatements.