Gramsci Are you serious? The devs have already explained clearly why this is not a bug...
The quote from the devs you have taken from Github (without actually citing where you got the quote from). It was actually I response to me, so it's strange that you think I haven't seen this, or you are deliberately ignoring this to misrepresent the situation. I provided my response on Github to why that statement from the devs is an oversimplification and in fact the problems with RCS on Graphene should be viewed as a bug. The devs response was to say Github is not a discussion forum, basically a refusal to consider the way a large number of people are trapped with broken carrier goup messaging, because of how Graphene breaks RCS. That was more evidence to me that the devs do not understand the predicament many of us are in or do not want to take responsibility for it, even though GrapeneOS claims to be a fully functional mobile OS, which in my opinion should include working with basic mobile network functionality, like carrier based messaging.
In any case, you clearly have not read the Github issue on this problem and are selectively quoting certain things out of context. I have read the entire Github issue.
Gramsci Looks to me like you are lying. A key project member states in an open Github issue: "We do plan to provide a way to use this for carriers needing it."
I literally said in my response to you that at first the devs said they were going to address the problem, but they have increasingly downplayed the significance of the problem. The quote you provide was from October of last year. That was quite a while ago for those of us who keep having to do hacky things, like reinstalling old versions of Messages every 36 hours, to desparately try to keep carrier based group messaging working. Since then the devs have more and more downplayed the issue or become silent about it, as I described in my reponse to you. That is how things have played out. Again you are picking and choosing quotes out of context to misrepresent the situation. You also have a strange idea of what "lying" means since I acknowleged in my reponse to you the fact that you bring up. You seem to think that when someone has a point of view that is not your own and understands the facts better than you then it must be "lying."
Gramsci If you, or a tiny subset of users, are so reliant on RCS that you want to go back to stock Android, it is what it is.
Again you are just ignoring and twisting what I and others have said. First, there is no basis for you "tiny subset" assertion. This problem potentially affects every Graphene user on two thirds of the mobile carriers in the U.S. Many people feel trapped by how RCS breaks group messaging and have stated so here. This thread is by several orders of magnitude the most commented thread on the Graphene forums (with thousands of comments, compared to single digits or occasionally in the tens for other threads). Second, nobody wants to go back to stock Android. But we are stuck with broken carrier messaging, because of how Graphene is not compatible with RCS as the carriers have chosen to implement it. People have been very clear about this in this thread. Again, you are misrepresenting what I said in response to you and what many others have said in this thread, decribing the nature of the problem Graphene is causing with RCS and by extension carrier based messaging.
Gramsci The issue you are flagging is a bit of a moving target and there isn't much of a rush from a privacy perspective...
Gramsci "RCS is only more private than SMS if Google Messages is being used at both ends with the Google Messages end-to-end encryption protocol....
Again, this is totally ignoring the real issue. People are trapped with broken group carrier messaging and can't disable RCS. That is the issue. This is not about privacy and end-to-end encryption. What is more, again the quote you provide about RCS and privacy comes from the Github issue on RCS, but you do not cite where you took it from. That quote is from one of the devs and I responded to it on Github as well as in this thread. The quote reflects a real misunderstanding of what RCS is. It is not merely about end-to-end encryption. RCS, even without E2EE provides transport layer encryption, which is hugely more secure and private than SMS which is entirely plain text. It also includes all sorts of author authorization and verification procedures to help to fight fraud and spam. The devs response to my pointing some of these things out was, again, to say "The issue tracker is not a dicussion forum." In otherwords, to shut down the discussion about RCS and the problems people are having on Graphene. I don't know if the devs honestly don't understand what RCS is, that seems hard to believe. But talking about it as if it's just about E2EE is a significant misrepresentation.
Anyway, I would suggest you seem to be the one lacking techinical understanding and just general knowledge about what's going on with RCS, both in general and specifically in relation to GrapheneOS.