Get it on Accrescent

[ghost]

Describe the feature you want to implement:

The app to be available on the Accrescent app store (https://accrescent.app).

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe:

I do feel having proper app distribution channel is necessary for an app to get seamless updates and have a bit more security.

Do other music players handle this? If so, how?

No, none of the music players or apps for that matter have this feature since Accrescent is not yet production ready. It will be ready this Christmas I guess.

Why do you think this will improve everyone's usage of Auxio?

Having the app in an app store like Accrescent compared to F-droid will drastically improve privacy and security.

Due Diligence:

• [✓] I have read the Contribution Guidelines.
• [✓] I have read the Accepted Additions and Requests document.
• [✓] I have checked for this feature in the FAQ.

[OxygenCobalt]

Looks promising, but very immature. Even when it hits 1.0 I'd imagine it would take awhile until it catches on (if at all). F-Droid works well enough for now.

[ghost]

Looks promising, but very immature. Even when it hits 1.0 I'd imagine it would take awhile until it catches on (if at all). F-Droid works well enough for now.

F-droid has numerous security issues and architectural flaws that cannot be fixed. I highly recommend reading the article written by Wonderfall (https://wonderfall.dev) linked below for more context on this issue. https://wonderfall.dev/fdroid-issues/

[OxygenCobalt]

Network effects. Even if it is in-secure, F-Droid is still the best distribution pathway at the moment. Accrescent isn't even out of alpha, let alone accepting apps

Plus, that article is really slanted. The argument is basically "F-Droid is bad because it's not a monolithic 'Cathedral' with strict rules and a single airtight distribution pathway". Wonderfall seems like a GrapheneOS contributor, so this perspective makes sense, but is pretty unorthodox compared to most of FOSS. Plus, it feels extremely anemic for a supposed free-software enthusiast to recommend the Play Store for FOSS app distrbution because "Oh, well google hasn't remotely modified and re-signed app bundles yet!".

[ghost]

Network effects. Even if it is in-secure, F-Droid is still the best distribution pathway at the moment. Accrescent isn't even out of alpha, let alone accepting apps

So then why don't you use the Google Play Store it is the best distribution pathway right?

Accrescent isn't even out of alpha, let alone accepting apps

Accrescent will be out of alpha this Christmas as a present for developers like you.

Plus, that article is really slanted. The argument is basically "F-Droid is bad because it's not a monolithic 'Cathedral' with strict rules and a single airtight distribution pathway".

There many more things mentioned in that article for example- Slow updates, App signatures, Sdk, Autoupdates, Misleading permissions, Third party repos.

Wonderfall seems like a GrapheneOS contributor, so this perspective makes sense, but is pretty unorthodox compared to most of FOSS.

No he is not a GrapheneOS contributor but, he is a member of the community.

So do you think its unorthodox for FOSS to have proper security model? Your app is sandboxed properly in android and also takes advantage of lot of security features that android provides but just publish in an app store where I don't need to trust any other dev other than you and also don't want to update manually everytime. I don't want you to publish now in Accresent since it is impossible but, publish it when you get the oppurtunity.

[ghost]

Looks promising, but very immature. Even when it hits 1.0 I'd imagine it would take awhile until it catches on (if at all). F-Droid works well enough for now.

Of course it will catch on since the huge user base of GrapheneOS will be looking into it and also many of GOS users are waiting for a modern, free(as in freedom), private, secure, minimal, app store and there isn't one yet and accrescent is the only hope.

[OxygenCobalt]

So then why don't you use the Google Play Store it is the best distribution pathway right?

Clarification: Best distrbution pathway that I agree with philosophically.

Of course it will catch on since the huge user base of GrapheneOS will be looking into it and also many of GOS users are waiting for a modern, free(as in freedom), private, secure, minimal, app store and there isn't one yet and accrescent is the only hope.

If this does indeed occur, I will change my mind.

[OxygenCobalt]

I'll state it like this: If GrapheneOS officially moves to launch their own F-Droid competitor, either by adopting Accrescent or extending Apps, I will port Auxio over. At that point, the wide exposure to GrapheneOS users will warrant me porting it.

[ghost]

I'll state it like this: If GrapheneOS officially moves to launch their own F-Droid competitor, either by adopting Accrescent or extending Apps, I will port Auxio over. At that point, the wide exposure to GrapheneOS users will warrant me porting it.

Of course GrapheneOS won't do it an offcial way but you know few years back GrapheneOS was almost always used with f-droid. The same will happen here.

You don't need to port or something you just have to publish it in accrescent as well.

Philosophically Accrescent is better as it also values user and dev usability from the ground up along with security and privacy in mind.

It is clearly better than F-droid in every possible way.

NOTE: I am not an official Accrescent dev/mod/lead. Just a user that's it. Whatever I say, take it with a grain of salt. Clarify with Logan Magee if you want to know the whole truth.

You can also watch this podcast in AndroidBytes - https://blog.esper.io/distribute-apps-without-google-play/

[OxygenCobalt]

You don't need to port or something you just have to publish it in accrescent as well.

Oh, I assumed that I had to make my own app metadata and build recipe like I have to do with F-Droid, hence why I used port. Apparently this is not the case, all I'll have to do is upload a bundle. That's kind of nice.

[matchboxbananasynergy]

As an update to this, Accrescent is now in alpha, and documentation for the project is up:

https://accrescent.app/docs/index.html

Things are of course subject to change given the project's early state, and apps can currently only be submitted after the developer is whitelisted. Hiccups are probably to be expected, so if a developer (in this case, @OxygenCobalt) wants to wait till things are more set in stone, that's completely fine.

[OxygenCobalt]

Thanks for letting me know. Honestly, I've been warming up to it solely for the ease of publishing. I think the developer portal will be a huge selling point compared to the PR/Auto-update flow of F-Droid.

[matchboxbananasynergy]

Thanks for letting me know. Honestly, I've been warming up to it solely for the ease of publishing. I think the developer portal will be a huge selling point compared to the PR/Auto-update flow of F-Droid.

Yeah, it feels pretty easy IMO. A couple of developers have already joined and published their apps and have also pushed updates, which I received. :smile: So even though it's still early days, the core functionality works from both a developer and end-user perspective.

Right now you'd have to login to the developer console to push an update, but the lead developer has mentioned that the plan is for this to be nearly fully automated in the future.

Best thing about it is that you get to sign the app, so if you ever change you mind and want to stop publishing on Accrescent, people can still keep getting your app from GitHub Releases or elsewhere, for example. You're not going to be locked in, which is always nice :)

[OxygenCobalt]

Okay, I'll keep this open until Accrescent enters beta/wider use. If you want to see the Auxio on Accresent, please let me know by reacting, as that allows me to gauge how popular it has become.

[e-zk]

@OxygenCobalt ping since Accrescent has matured a bit since the last activity on this issue, and around 10 apps are available on there now.

However: still no app description or app screenshots.

When would you say it would be mature enough for you to consider adding Auxio?

[OxygenCobalt]

I would more consider how mature the dev console is @e-zk. Last I checked it was really rough-looking and relied on GitHub OAuth, which I'm uncomfortable with granting so many permissions to.

[matchboxbananasynergy]

I would more consider how mature the dev console is @e-zk. Last I checked it was really rough-looking and relied on GitHub OAuth, which I'm uncomfortable with granting so many permissions to.

@OxygenCobalt Regarding the dev console, it's currently in the later stages of being re-written from scratch.

https://twitter.com/accrescentapp/status/1666555097445470208

Regarding GitHub OAuth, I'm unsure what you mean "so many permissions". I can ask and get back to you with specifics, but I believe it likely requires the bare minimum.

I believe that the plan is to eventually support more, though GitHub is a nice start and likely preferred due to being able to secure your GitHub account with hardware keys etc.

[matchboxbananasynergy]

An update: The Accrescent Developer Console only asks to access your GitHub account's e-mail, which is done in order for Accrescent to have a way to reach out to you if something is needed.