Accrescent isn't the future

jonah:

Is it basically just a gift I’m giving that he’ll just pocket because he doesn’t have time to work on it yet?

Since the call for donations, lberrymage has been working very consistently on it.

LogicSnoop:

The developers made many promises that the app itself would be improved in the near future

LogicSnoop:

In the ‘Roadmap’ section under the short-term timeline, it states that in the next month, some new features (such as a log description and a screenshot for every listed app) would be added to the Accrescent app. However, the blog was created on 11/08/2025, and today is 20/05/2026. I personally still don’t see these features.

The first item on the roadmap, the migration to the directory service, has been completed, though it took longer than expected. The reason the other features haven’t been implemented yet is because they decided on an unplanned rewrite of the client app, which fixed a lot of bugs people were having. Both this and the directory service migration were large undertakings. They explain all of this in this blog post.

Our original plan three months ago was to add more app-visible features after the directory service / app store API migration was complete, e.g., long descriptions, localized app listings, and app listing screenshots. However, we realized at this point in development that the Accrescent app itself was in need of a serious refresh; there were over a dozen unresolved bug reports including unexpected crashes, various UI bugs, and a handful of requested features which had gone unimplemented. So instead of continuing with adding more app-visible features, we instead decided to overhaul the Accrescent app to resolve all known bugs, add a bunch of new features, and enhance its UI to be more snappy, correct, and informative.

I highly encourage anyone who’s interested in the project to read the full thing. It also details what will be coming next, which is what they’ve been working on since this was posted. Instead of continuing with the initial roadmap, they decided to shift the focus on developer experience, which is imo the right call if they want to open up app submissions as quickly as possible. This includes designing a new app publishing format, creating an app publishing API and developing a CLI tool. For many app developers, an API to automate the publishing process is a hard requirement before they’re willing to submit their app to Accrescent (see for example here or here).

As part of this work, they are currently in the process of rewriting Parcelo, the developer console backend. You can follow the progress here.

Just because you don’t see any user-facing improvement doesn’t mean no work is being done.

LogicSnoop:

The apps have remained the same for nearly a year. I also donated some money to this project, but apparently, I was mistaken. To me, it’s a flop project that won’t continue to grow.

jonah:

Accescent doesn’t even fully serve the needs of the developer himself , unless he literally only uses the few apps that are on Accrescent and installs nothing else?

_TrustyRocinante:

But, I will admit that their selection process on apps seems almost random for such a small selection.

Accrescent doesn’t decide which apps to publish, app developers are the ones who decide they want to publish their app on Accrescent and go submit it.

At the moment, Accrescent is basically in a pilot phase, so the apps on there are those whose developers were willing to put up with a lackluster user experience, bugs, breaking changes, etc. Obviously, many aren’t gonna want to do that. Since quite some time, app submissions have actually been closed and will only reopen when Accrescent is able to offer a better experience (still planned to happen this year). If you go around the FOSS Android ecosystem, a lot of apps have open issues regarding inclusion in Accrescent and devs are just waiting for it to become more mature. That’s why the background work that is currently being done is very important.

I don’t know how people can say that there is no need for a project like Accrescent when the best option we have for general Android app distribution is a proprietary privacy-invasive store operated by a monopolistic company, which requires an account and doesn’t allow developers to sign their app themselves.

Sure, it would be nice if all apps people want/need to use were open source and could be included in a FOSS-only store, but this isn’t realistic. We absolutely need an alternative to the Play Store. Of course, Accrescent having enough apps for people to not need anything else is a pipe dream, it would need to gain a lot of momentum before a lot of proprietary apps start caring (GrapheneOS itself gaining momentum could help), but that doesn’t mean this shouldn’t be attempted. Some proprietary apps, like Qlango or Cape, are already on there.

Even for FOSS apps, it’s good to have an option that follows security best practices, has developers submitting their own signed builds and doesn’t introduce delays for updates. That doesn’t mean there isn’t also a place for stores focused on open source, with more vetting regarding privacy, etc. Those can exist in parallel to Accrescent, whose goal is general app distribution.