Dave

From my understanding, any app installed directly from Google Play should be in the sandbox and have access to Google Play Services. I haven't quite worked out where the steps are missing, but it seems when the game is open it's fine, and when the game hasn't been killed by the OS it's also fine. If I go back to the game and it has to launch again from scratch, it doesn't seem to count steps that happened while the game wasn't running (foreground or background).

I also see this post where others are seeing the same thing, and are not using GrapheneOS. Maybe my use of GrapheneOS is a red herring and there's actually something else happening.

It was always odd to me that apps need to be constantly active to get the steps. I don't get why the phone doesn't just count in the background then allow you to request "how many steps today" or "how many steps since X date/time" via the API.

I'm using GrapheneOS and struggling to get the game to count steps when it's not actively open. Anyone else using GrapheneOS and have any tips?

I thought I'd mention as it hasn't been mentioned yet: the only way to install the game on Android is through Google Play. You also need to join a Google Group to get access on Google Play.

Very long unskippable cutscenes before all bosses.

It's probably assumed but just to be clear - the save point is before the cutscene, so if you die then you have to watch the cut scene again every time.

They have talked a bit about what they are trying to do. It's backed by Silicon Valley billionaire Eron Wolf, and he has talked about his frustration with everyone putting their blood, sweat, and tears into the software and then someone like Facebook comes along and makes billions from the work of others.

I get it's frustrating, but personally I think it fails to see that Facebook is part of the ecosystem, but also so are many small companies, and many of these are contributing back to the software. If you remove the companies then you have removed a significant source of help. Eron wants to replace this with an expectation that people pay for their software, he wants to normalise paying for OSS so OSS doesn't have to rely on the companies. You can see this in how FUTO keyboard using language implying you need to pay to get a license, but also it holds no features back from you and doesn't nag if you don't pay.

Personally I welcome new ways of thinking but even if the pay for your OSS thing works I think companies are uniquely placed to contribute in ways that a small team relying on purchases is never going to be able to replicate.

I don't hold any ill will though, I think their heart is in the right place, albeit having missed what makes FOSS special.

Haha yeah I do find the licence a bit weird. Kind of a non-commercial licence but there are definitely some parts that I don't quite get.

I have seen Eron Wolf talking a bit about what he is trying to do. I get his frustrations, but am not convinced their licence helps with those at all. You can't really take open source, take away some freedoms that are sometimes taken advantage of, and pretend that removing those freedoms didn't remove the benefits that are the reason those freedoms existed in the first place.

Typically licenses not OSI approved are referred to as "Source available" rather than "Open source". This is one reason FUTO (who make Grayjay) refer to their license as "Source first" and not "Open Source" (though they did call it that for a while before clarifying and switching to the new term).

Sounds good!

Perhaps take on board the comments on this post, draft up a proposed template on the repo, and then perhaps do a new post asking for feedback? Is it worth creating a community for those interested to follow if they want to discuss, ask questions, propose ideas, etc, or is that better done on the repo?

I'm wondering if the git option is best? A public github repo is a bit more permanent, means it stays available into the future even if it stops getting maintained.

The main issue with that is the technical hurdle for contributing, but I don't see why people can't comment on this post or future ones with comments if they don't want to do a pull request.

I prefer that over the Google docs option, and Lemmy comments are good for discussion but I think we need an "official" place to point people to. We can still discuss on Lemmy before making updates.

I’m going to be away for a few days, but I’ll see about listing out these new questions and other changes. Maybe we can put them somewhere to make it easier to collaborate and track changes?

That sounds like a good idea. Any thoughts on where?

For our census I self-hosted Lime Survey (using this not-official docker image). Took a little bit of working out but I think the survey worked out quite good. There are lots of options to pick through, including various levels of privacy settings, and I've also run some other community surveys using it in the past.

I like this idea. Getting some sort of insights into Lemmy.