A spokesperson for Google offered some additional context on this decision, stating that it helps simplify development, eliminates the complexity of managing multiple code branches, and allows them to deliver more stable and secure code to Android platform developers.
I am not a developer, but this sounds like bullshit. Google does have the ability to manage multiple code branches, they are one of the largest and richest software services companies on the planet.
The “deliver stable and secure code” also sounds like generic copytext that you would without any real context.
Large american technology companies cannot be trusted by definition.
There was a whole term called “branching strategy” to handle things way more complex than a quarterly release - this is about nothing more than control. Bet it will be one to zero releases next year. They’re speed-running enshittification before a worthy open replacement can be written.
Cutting a release (and publishing) does cost significant time and effort. You effectively need to code-freeze, get all code merged into main, run all tests and QA, fix any breaking bugs, compete signoffs etc. On some of our small projects, doing a release could burn up to 2 weeks of real time, which on a monthly release cycle was killing us.
So I can almost buy their reasoning. But otherwise, agree that they can’t be trusted, and releasing once a quarter doesnt seem that hard.
Of course. Although I can kinda see why they dont want to do that either. All the fly-by-night OEMs would be using dev and shipping half-baked ROMs (which I guess they do anyway, but it would be worse).
Writing code for a website and writing code for a platform that supports many hardware devices with different architectures are very very very different software engineering tasks. And this is before discussing BSP’s.
Your assertion about the difficulty of this process is not tethered to reality nor informed by experience with OS or hardware support. I make no claims about any other points you made.
They might not, but I do have experience as a developer for the operating system for a manufacturing robotics company, which had a large array of different hardware configurations to support, some stretching back to 1982. I actually managed the build system for the company (with branch management handled through Perforce, though I’ve done plenty in GIT since).
It’s absolutely not as hard as you’re making it sound and they’ve shown for years they can manage it just fine. This follows on the back of several other anti-consumer announcements such as the side loading lockdown and their removal of entire chunks of AOSP like device trees and such. This is absolutely just to lock out custom ROMs and they’re giving the most thin veneer of an excuse.
They’re still managing all those branches internally. Absolutely nothing is stopping them from doing, I dunno, a preview branch or whatever. Other large open source projects, including complex operating systems, manage it just fine.
I am not a developer, but this sounds like bullshit. Google does have the ability to manage multiple code branches, they are one of the largest and richest software services companies on the planet.
The “deliver stable and secure code” also sounds like generic copytext that you would without any real context.
Large american technology companies cannot be trusted by definition.
Sounds more like “we’re trying to close it off completely without saying it out loud and hope everyone forgets about our numerous GPL violations”.
Could people ask them for the code constantly.
“do no evil”… right?
That’s in the past.
To their credit: when they changed their motto, they clearly announced that they will do evil.
There are not many companies who announce their switch to the dark side.
Apparently all Sundar heard when he took over was “Do mumblemumble evil”
There was a whole term called “branching strategy” to handle things way more complex than a quarterly release - this is about nothing more than control. Bet it will be one to zero releases next year. They’re speed-running enshittification before a worthy open replacement can be written.
Cutting a release (and publishing) does cost significant time and effort. You effectively need to code-freeze, get all code merged into main, run all tests and QA, fix any breaking bugs, compete signoffs etc. On some of our small projects, doing a release could burn up to 2 weeks of real time, which on a monthly release cycle was killing us.
So I can almost buy their reasoning. But otherwise, agree that they can’t be trusted, and releasing once a quarter doesnt seem that hard.
You could just have less releases but still develop everything openly…
Of course. Although I can kinda see why they dont want to do that either. All the fly-by-night OEMs would be using dev and shipping half-baked ROMs (which I guess they do anyway, but it would be worse).
I don’t mind it since Android doesn’t change much these days
Do you mean visually or under the hood?
Writing code for a website and writing code for a platform that supports many hardware devices with different architectures are very very very different software engineering tasks. And this is before discussing BSP’s.
Your assertion about the difficulty of this process is not tethered to reality nor informed by experience with OS or hardware support. I make no claims about any other points you made.
Have a good day, friend.
They might not, but I do have experience as a developer for the operating system for a manufacturing robotics company, which had a large array of different hardware configurations to support, some stretching back to 1982. I actually managed the build system for the company (with branch management handled through Perforce, though I’ve done plenty in GIT since).
It’s absolutely not as hard as you’re making it sound and they’ve shown for years they can manage it just fine. This follows on the back of several other anti-consumer announcements such as the side loading lockdown and their removal of entire chunks of AOSP like device trees and such. This is absolutely just to lock out custom ROMs and they’re giving the most thin veneer of an excuse.
They’re still managing all those branches internally. Absolutely nothing is stopping them from doing, I dunno, a preview branch or whatever. Other large open source projects, including complex operating systems, manage it just fine.
I agree that I have minimal experience with this. :)
I simply don’t trust what Google says and I assume that their being less than honest by default.