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.
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 ask.
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
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 ask.
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