this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
418 points (98.2% liked)
Open Source
31336 readers
318 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you look at the description you can see that they clearly say that it isn’t official:
Don’t know why they’d put “Developer of the Newpipe app” as dev though
My guess is that they did not want to take credit as the developer of NewPipe itself. As if to say "We did not develop NewPipe, we just packaged it as a Flatpak". There is probably a better way to get that across in the byline, but I believe that is the intent.
malicious intent
One could also think that whoever packaged this was hurried while filling a form, and wanted to provide credit where it was due. So, maybe they were on the best of their intents... We don't know.
If I were to use this, I would check other apps from same uploader. Or better, see what permissions are being asked..
In any case, trusting blindly github contributors on teamnewpipe organization is not extremely different.
Trust and credibility are volatile and freely given. It's youtube, not my bank account ;p