Re: Android port (was: gnulib fsusage)

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2023 12:38:11 +0300
> From: Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, luangruo@yahoo.com,
>   emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> * Konstantin Kharlamov <hi-angel@yandex.ru> [2023-01-28 10:50]:
> > On Fri, 2023-01-20 at 09:19 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > > Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 09:47:34 +0300
> > > > From: Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>
> > > > Cc: Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > > > 
> > > > * Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> [2023-01-19 17:28]:
> > > > > First, we need to decide whether we indeed want to have this in Emacs.
> > > > > Android is not a free platform, so when its support comes with a lot
> > > > > of additional non-trivial code that we'd need to understand and
> > > > > support/maintain (including a lot of Java), we had better discussed
> > > > > that first.
> > > > 
> > > > Replicant is free platform.
> > > 
> > > That fact is not relevant to this discussion.
> > 
> > I think the point Jean meant to make is that Android platform per se isn't
> > closed, even if the unfortunate situation is that many vendors ship a lot of
> > closed code, mainly drivers (tho situation with closed drivers is slowly
> > improving, Google seem to be working on that).
> 
> Yes, Eli mentioned "Android is not free platform", and I have
> mentioned Android-based fully free platform.
> 
> LineageOS is not free that I know as it includes non-free drivers or 
> something.

This is all irrelevant to the issue at hand in this thread.  The issue
at hand here is whether and how much of an effort we want to invest in
this non-free platform.  It is exactly the same question as we ask
ourselves wrt MS-Windows.