CVSROOT: /webcvs/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Richard M. Stallman <rms> 12/01/09 16:29:41
Modified files:
philosophy : android-and-users-freedom.html
Log message:
Update for release of Android 3 source.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/android-and-users-freedom.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.9&r2=1.10
Patches:
Index: android-and-users-freedom.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/android-and-users-freedom.html,v
retrieving revision 1.9
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -b -r1.9 -r1.10
--- android-and-users-freedom.html 24 Nov 2011 14:01:57 -0000 1.9
+++ android-and-users-freedom.html 9 Jan 2012 16:29:23 -0000 1.10
@@ -63,10 +63,9 @@
<p>Google has complied with the requirements of the GNU General Public
License for Linux, but the Apache license on the rest of Android does
-not require source release. Google has said it will never publish the
-source code of Android 3.0 (aside from Linux), even though executables
-have been released to the public. Android 3.1 source code is also
-being withheld. Thus, Android 3, apart from Linux, is nonfree
+not require source release. Google said it would never publish the
+source code of Android 3.0 (aside from Linux). Android 3.1 source code
+was also withheld, making Android 3, apart from Linux, nonfree
software pure and simple.</p>
<p>Google said it withheld the 3.0 source code because it was buggy, and
@@ -76,12 +75,13 @@
who want to include some of the changes in their own versions could
use that code just fine.</p>
-<p>Fortunately, source code was released for version 4.0, making the
-nonrelease of version 3 a temporary aberration rather than a policy
-shift. However, what happens once may happen again.</p>
+<p>Fortunately, Google later released the source code for Android 3.*
+when it released version 4 (also with source code.) The problem above
+turned out to be a temporary aberration rather than a policy shift.
+However, what happens once may happen again.</p>
-<p>In any case, most of the source code of some versions of Android has
-been released as free software. Does that mean that products using
+<p>In any case, most of the source code of various versions of Android
+has been released as free software. Does that mean that products using
those Android versions respect users' freedom? No, for several
reasons.</p>
@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@
<p>Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2011/11/24 14:01:57 $
+$Date: 2012/01/09 16:29:23 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
