Software crafter and digital punker keen on open source, iOS and Android apps. Interested in software ecodesign, privacy and accessibility too. pylapersonne.info
That’s vibe coding.


What about Bitchat?
Yup, I meant Mozilla Public License
Yes indeed the Apple App Store is not compatible with GNU GPL v3 licence. Maybe MOL MPLcan suits your needs.
However plenty of open source apps under GPL v3 or AGPL v3 are available on the App Store and Apple does not care.
For example:
It is complicated. He says true. And maybe your need to use GrapheneOS is relevant. If you have a smartphone without cellular connection, for a daily usage, FMPOV it is a non-sense in case of emergency. It is a risk you will have to take, I can’t disagree your dad. And what about your solution but with a SIM card with very few data and SMS available, through a SIM card you can keep aside your phone and insert when needed?


Did you have a look on ethical licenses? For example, Coraline Ada Hemke who created the Contributor Covenant (famous code of conduct) started few years ago the Organisation for Ethical Source promoting “ethical” licenses defined by seven principles.
So in fact this third family of licenses is not open source nor free (as defined by OSI and FSF), nevertheless I feel some needs or willings in your side to go, let’s say, “one step further”.
In ethical licenses you can find for example 999 ICU, ACAB, Anti-Capitalist, Peer Production, Hippocratic or some BSD 3-Clause variants about nuclear topics.
You can also have a look on that slidedeck (in French, sorry).
Did you have a look on Cake Wallet app? Open source under MIT license and available on F-Droid.


An app? Nope. For notifications, there is open source alternatives to Google and Apple services but it is used in the apps side, not users side. Have a look on microG and Open GApps to flash in your Android device; it might help you.


It seems the “radical” organisations like the FSF or the OES were right and more legitimate in the end.


It is always the same issues in fact. You should consider your threat model before all. Then, consider the Signal app, then your iPhone supposed to be updated, trusted, with ADP enabled, biometric lock with erasure after 10 failures, etc. Then consider your ISP, then your country. Etc, etc. You should also compare the contexts. Is an iPhone “better” than a low or middle ranges Android-powered smartphones? For sure, yes. Is it better than high-range expansive smartphones with Android ? Or Pixel ones? Not that sure. And compared to GrapheneOS or /e/? Pretty sure not that much. You can also compare messaging solutions. Is Signal better than WhatApp? Of course yes. But what about XMPP and Matrix for example?
And what are your use cases? Remember your threat model. If you are an activist, a journalist or a whistleblower your needs may be different than a “commons citizen worried about its privacy.
In few words, the only pain point I see is the fact than iOS is proprietary and runs non libre source code and Apple devices than APN. But Android devices are not so much different. It does not mean the solution is not private or efficient, if we succeed in defining a definition of “private or efficient”.
In a nutshell, it could be considered as good. But not perfect.


Any ideas for E2E encrypted storage alternatives?


Enshitification made third-party apps disappeared. Prefer true open source project instead like Pixelfed for example.


In software ecosystem indeed there is an issue about the word “free” which can mean “free of charge” or “libre”, that is the reason why the term FOSS should be replaced by FLOSS.
In this very software world, the OSI defined “open source” by 10 conditions. The FSF defined also since eons the term “free / libre” by 4 liberties. These two things are the base of trust and understanding for every one.
For several years capitalist companies try to redefine these words because cannot bear to see that communities dislike or hate how they change the licences of their products (e.g. Elastic with BSL, Mongo with SSPL, Terraform with BSL too). They try to get excuse and fake reasons to be allowed to change the definitions but they are not legit at all.
About your example for a “free and anticapitalist” license, it cannot by “free” because one of the four liberties of the “free” definition is not filled.
However this is an interesting point because there is a new family of licences which appeared several years ago: the ethical licenses brought by the Organisation for Ethical Source (https://ethicalsource.dev/) which define the term « ethical source » by 7 principles. You can get more details about the anti-capitalist license here: https://anticapitalist.software/).
In few words, we must keep the OSI, FSF and OES definitions for open source, free and ethical source words because there are meanings, history, facts and fights behind. If they are disturbing for people or if people disagree, they have to create something else. Not change the definition for pure rebranding.


There is one definition of free in FLOSS. The FSF definition.


If it is your project, no need to get headaches about this. However keep for example the stuff like “Copyright YEAR - your-name” and say it’s under GPL 3 license. But nothing more.


It is kind of copyfarleft, so by essence it is it open source according to the OSI definition (which must by the only definition to use), more free / libre according to the FSF definition (which is the only definition also to keep).
Interesting! Do you remember where you got this chart?
Do you have some comparison documentation or benchmark to share comparing for example GitHub, GitLab, SourceHut and Codeberg?
I did not succeed in finding something comparing these forges about: -CI/CD
I am used to GirHub and GitLab but not Codebeg 🤔