1

This question is not clarifying about the terms of the Google Play Program Policies (as per Are developer-centric questions about application stores on topic?).

I have an open-source application, for Android that I have developed recently. This application is also published on other app stores (e.g. Samsung Galaxy Store). The app contains a button linking to the open-source repository. In the repository README, links to 3rd party app stores are listed.

I am aware that Google Play disallows links to other app distribution channels in your app.

However, since my application links to the open-source repo, which presents the README to the user, and the README contains multiple non-compliant links to other app stores, this would be a policy violation.

What is the best solution to present different READMEs for different variants for the app? I can create a mirror, but the non-compliant README will be copied over as well. I do not think a separate branch is appropriate for just a README, which would complicate matters.

Please leave a comment if you feel my question is too vague.

Thank you.

torek
  • 448,244
  • 59
  • 642
  • 775
LCZ
  • 589
  • 1
  • 9
  • 15
  • 1
    i wonder if this would even be a violation of the policy, it's not your app linking to other distributions, instead it's a file which your app presents, but impossible for me to say – a_local_nobody Nov 21 '21 at 12:57
  • 1
    IMHO, the simplest solution is to not worry about it, per a_local_nobody's comment. The next-simplest solution is to move the links to other app distribution channels off of the main `README.md` file and into some other documentation file. But, you could achieve your requested technical objective by having `README.md` and `README-PLAY.md` (or whatever) in the repo, and have your Play Store build link to the latter (e.g., using `buildConfigField` or a string resource for the Play edition's product flavor). – CommonsWare Nov 21 '21 at 13:26
  • Thank you for your suggestions,@CommonsWare and a_local_nobody. I prefer to assume that such a link would result in a policy violation, especially for small developers (as evidenced in https://stackoverflow.com/a/64671968/12204281). I will consider the option stated in @CommonsWare's comment. – LCZ Nov 22 '21 at 05:53

0 Answers0