Android app licensing - is it Free open source?

Self-Hosted | v4/Legacy
1

I read the news about new apps becoming available and was wondering if they are freely licensed under an open source license. Can I install the Android app without using Google Play?

The main reason I moved to Invoice Ninja (as a paid customer from the start) was to avoid any of the proprietary offerings out there and now I can see how it is slowly becoming open core.

The Android app seems to require in-app payment permissions needed to (apparently) pay for subscription to the commercial SaaS offering, while remaining compatible with self-hosted installs. This probably includes code specific to that use (tying to the commercial service) so I understand this can not be the same version as a completely Free open source version.

I’d really like InvoiceNinja remaining coherent with its initial licensing model, will it be possible soon to use this app via F-Droid?

2

Hi Magic,

The iPhone and Android apps are not open source as such as they have incurred significant financial investment to develop, maintain and extend functionality.

The apps are definitely free to use however with the commercial SaaS offering.

The in-app purchase allows the application to connect to a users self-installed installation. Much the same as we offer white-label licensing for self-install users.

3

So, MagicFab, lemme get this straight.

You went from a commercial offering (me too: I was using Freshbooks) to Invoice Ninja because it’s code is open source and you can self host for free. By the way, I love that by having access to the source code I can customize it to my business’ needs.

Hillel (always helpful) and other developers, just like us, have bills to pay, so they have to find ways to monetize Invoice Ninja. Yet they are still willing to provide the full source code for anyone who wants to do a bit of work to host their own instance.

Their monetization is based on providing a ready-to-use version (hosting/SaaS) and a mobile app, which is either free (if you subscribe to the SaaS version) or with a small in-app purchase (if you self host). The subscription costs $6,66 or $10 per month, and the in-app purchase probably costs even less. Even the white label license is incredibly cheap ($1,66 per month). I was paying Freshbooks $29,95 per month and it didn’t have all the possibilities that Invoice Ninja provides, even with their flashy brand-new version (I was really disappointed when they told me about its features).

All in all, I assume you run a business and uses Invoice Ninja to track your customers, invoices and payments. And you’re telling us that you really, REALLY want everything for free?

“The main reason I moved to Invoice Ninja (as a paid customer from the start) was to avoid any of the proprietary offerings out there.”

“I’d really like InvoiceNinja remaining coherent with its initial licensing model”

I mean, c’mon, really? You know these guys really have no obligation to license ALL of their work as GPL, right? In fact, they even have no obligation to provide the source code, they could simply provide the SaaS offering and that would be it.

I may not fully understand your point of view with your question, but I believe that the open source movement is about collaborating and contributing, and so if you’re so inclined in having Invoice Ninja on the F-Droid market, why don’t you start by creating a simple web wrapper? Invoice Ninja has a nice responsive interface. I have a Windows Phone device and so there’s no app but I can still use it nicely via the browser. And it’s way better than that 90’s-inspired Freshbooks interface.

</rant>

:smiley:

4

@DavidBomba, thank you, this should be clarified on the apps pages or in an appropriate FAQ. I am disappointed and I understand why this is done. I don’t agree significant investment automatically means producing proprietary apps. There is always the option of writing my own given the current API access and availability, but my current use don’t absolutely requite this.

@denisgomes I am not requesting any of this to be free. There are many ways to finance this, keep the code free open source and still make money: I encourage you to research the subject. An important reason for IN adoption right now is the current license. If there was a campaign to finance this, IN is in a unique position to ask for their customers and users support. As the authors, they could dual-license, sell the binaries on Play and provide free versions in F-Droid, etc. There are many examples of free open source mobile apps with a commercial, for-profit business model.

In all honesty I consider any time spent on proprietary apps is wasted, IMO it would be best invested in having a 100% “web app” that increases mobile adoption. In fact, right now I wish instead of having new shiny apps the totals matched in my invoices. :wink:

Any proprietary apps that deal with my personal data are already enough to worry about, including permissions, access to other parts of my phone data, etc. Make this financial data and unfortunately common sense (and past history of leaks and data being sold) dictates not using any of it, nevermind that in this particular case I’d have to be using all of Google Apps foundation (Play, etc.) which I don’t, for the same reasons.

5

@MagicalFab thanks for your feedback. I understand there is a lot of passion about Open Source. If a funding model presents itself for us to release all our code as Open Source I am sure we would consider it!

6

“If there was a campaign to finance this”

I am not a developer, the IN developers should be in a better position to discuss about this, but I believe donations and financing campaigns aren’t enough these days (if that’s what you’re thinking about).

“There are many examples of free open source mobile apps with a commercial, for-profit business model.”
“As the authors, they could dual-license, sell the binaries on Play and provide free versions in F-Droid, etc”

Yeah, that’s right, and yeah, they could, but the developers are still under no obligation whatsoever to do anything at all. They can, and should, license and sell their work however they want, despite our beliefs, and not just because you or a specific group wants it.

If they don’t want to GPL their mobile app, then so be it. We should just be grateful that they decided to open source the main code.

“There is always the option of writing my own given the current API access and availability, but my current use don’t absolutely requite this.”

If your use don’t require this, then why are you asking for them to GPL the main app so it can be on the F-Droid store? You could simply open IN in your web browser and that’s it. Or if you really, really want an app, and don’t have the time or skills, you could pay a developer to do it for you (correct me if I’m wrong but that’s the spirit of open source, isn’t it?) - but I guess in that case the cost would be way higher than simply paying (and supporting) the original developers.

I don’t want to start a flame war, but i think we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

7

@DavidBomba, glad to see you’re open to that. I’ll be happy to comment on any such plan when/if made public, let me know if I can be of any help.

@denisgomes devs are probably in the worse position to make such decisions (except if they consider their work disappearing is OK, as a result of being proprietary).

[...] hey can, and should, license and sell their work however they want, despite our beliefs, [...]

It’s not “my beliefs”, it really is common sense + money. In this particular case I am also a paying customer and early adopter. I am very much part of their marketing team - good or bad. I can very much switch products and their revenue will decrease, so it’s not only my belief, it’s their revenue at stake too. I could mention my other contributions (however small or big), but I think money is a big part of the equation.

I am grateful the main code is Free. I am disappointed new code (apps) is not. The combination is not. I just found out after becoming a paying customer and after spending quite sometime migrating and reporting existing bugs. Should I be happier with buggy software that now has a proprietary app that I can’t use? No.

I am asking the question about licensing because it wasn’t clear from the website nor email that was sent. I will pay someone if I do need it (I often offer to do so), but it doesn’t make sense to do this individually. In fact I would even contribute financially to this, even if I don’t need it or use it. But not even asking the userbase to me indicates this wasn’t even given a thought - or someone recently invested lots of money and demanded this to be done under traditional business models.

When I decide to use a free open source application, I become a shareholder of sorts - I contribute to code, Q&A, documentation, and often financially. I often become deeply involved. When I see such a decision, to put resources (and money) I contributed to being used to produce proprietary software, I will certainly voice my disagreement - and explain in a constructive way to anyone caring enough to ask, no flames so far here :slight_smile:

8

One of your initial questions was ‘Can I install the Android app without using Google Play?’

Here’s a link to the APK: https://webapp-1.invoiceninja.com/app-release.apk

I believe it will only work for hosted users.