@privacyisconsent and @Dumdum Thank you for the clarification.
mrket This sounds like a very bad idea to me, and I understand why they would have a policy against it. A nontechnical user might assume an app store downloaded from Accrescent would be secure, as Accrescent itself has this reputation; you might understand this would be a false assumption, but an average user might not.
Let me explain why I suggested this. It's of course just my unsolicited opinion as a random outsider.
Presently on Accrescent there's already a hodgepodge of apps, some proprietary, with pretty much zero accompanying information whatsoever. So, as things are now, nothing at all can be safely assumed about them anyway. It's left as a homework assignment to the user to find out what they'd end up with if they hit the download button.
I understand these are teething problems and I'm not critical at all of the inclusion of proprietary apps. In fact, one of the unsolved problems of Google-less (googless?) Android is that it remains difficult for developers to be rewarded for their work. It'd be great if Accrescent were to facilitate that too, eventually.
It's just that, given the above, I wouldn't see it as crossing some sort of Rubicon if an app were to be made available there that could then be used to download other software from elsewhere. This is of course proscribed by proprietary app stores under the pretense of user protection but in those cases it's about the protection of their cut. And even then, as an evil, greedy corporation you have to lure users first before you cordon them off in a walled garden.
In any case, that's not Accrescent's situation at all. Separately, right now it's also not exactly a place where non-technical users congregate, so we might be getting a bit ahead of ourselves worrying about that: instead, I'd say optimize for early adopters first.
It's clear there're competent people behind this project who know how to properly design and implement a secure distribution mechanism, so it'd be great for it succeed. Users, developers – we'd all be better off. But it's important to point out, technologically superior solutions don't necessarily win – if they did, I wouldn't be typing this on a Windows PC, and even on a QWERTY keyboard. So we have to hope they find a way to establish themselves somehow. Once they do, we then get to benefit from the better design and technology behind it – but on its own, the mere fact that it is being done "properly" doesn't guarantee success at all.
So, just as a thought experiment, I see three principal ways for Accrescent to gain critical mass:
1. Massively grow the number of applications by an order of magnitude – or two. Automate submissions and updates. Become the "GitHub of stores," the go-to place for everything FLOSS.
Completely inconsistent with the stated aims of the project.
Unfeasible as it would require huge resources.
There are other places that already serve as a giant dump for pretty much everything, and their resources can't be outmatched.
2. Become a curated collection for all the best-in-class FLOSS apps, aiming for quality over quantity. In this scenario, listing only a smaller number of apps would be an advantage as it helps with discovery: people browse the store to find out about other interesting, high-quality apps, which is nearly impossible on Play Store and difficult on F-Droid; possibly Obtainium's "crowd-sourced app configurations" list can be used like that, although that is not its intended purpose. Eventually, being listed on Accrescent would become a badge of recognition and distinction for any FLOSS app.
Would still require huge effort to bring onboard numerous projects, doubling or tripling the number of apps.
For this to make sense, the metadata provided for each app would have to be significantly improved (not just description but possibly screenshots, and of course license). Also, there would have to be a way to differentiate between the "core" and more niche apps that are also listed (by means of categories or tags).
Probably most consistent with the project's goals. The reason it hasn't happened so far must be that it still would mean a lot of work in terms of developer-hours, which is where as I understand they're heavily constrained.
3. The "store of stores" concept I mentioned earlier. Make the Accrescent app well-known as the first store to install, as it gives a trusted path to other store clients and keeps them up-to-date, thus allowing everyone access to the entirety of the FLOSS ecosystem on Android: what is not available from Accrescent directly can still be obtained indirectly thanks to it, in the most secure way possible.
Only small resources necessary for this scenario as it would require the listing of only a single-digit number of apps.
The said apps are relatively well-known, so providing an enhanced description for them would not be a priority.
And that is why in my previous post I suggested (3), jumping straight to conclusion – but I did give it some thought.
I see on Accrescent's website there's a detailed explanation, listing several technological reasons why they don't want it: https://accrescent.app/faq#other-repos I'm not sure if I fully follow the principal argument, since on Android anyone can download and install an APK from anywhere if the system allows it, so by that logic it would follow that browsers and file managers should also be excluded as they can enable installing APKs from the Internet and/or the local filesystem.
Anyway, it's clear that scenario isn't going to materialize. People behind Accrescent have their own consistent vision for it, and they know what they're doing. I genuinely hope it works out and we can all enjoy the result. I wish them good luck and absolutely do not mean to criticize in any way. The task they took upon themselves is gargantuan. Keeping my fingers crossed.