@matchboxbananasynergy I'm considering various options. I'm not sure setting the post as draft until I can go over it is appropriate, or that it would prevent a mailing list post being sent. deleting it would also seem like a full retraction, which it isn't. This is still a problem.Could that blind user have provided instructions on how they got through any setup? I myself have plenty of experience flashing android devices. I made a flashable twrp zip to work around this issue on LOS based ROMs but not sure how much it would apply here. I still think that while a solution is being designed, there could be some way of supporting what currently exists, even if it requires a user opt in or a separate build while the tooling is made to unify the experience.

@fireborn I can ask them. I assume that they either have their own build of GrapheneOS which includes something like eSpeak NG, or that they enlisted someone's assistance when setting the device up.

I understand that both of these options might not be feasible for some people, but they are certainly options until there's a permanent solution that works out of the box.

The article as it stands right now unfortunately gets things about GrapheneOS works incorrectly (such as the section about sandboxed Google Play which has led many people to agreeing with you based on a false premise that we include Google Play by default, which we don't).

It is really causing harm to the project and is very saddening to our team because we're being accused of being ableist or not caring about accessbility. I don't believe that this is the purpose of the article, but rather pushing for a solution and potentially getting the word out to help a reasonable solution be developed, whether by our team or a third-party contributor. I don't believe the article currently does that and I really wish we weren't put into this position of having to defend the project and ourselves by explaining we're not something that we aren't.

Unlisting it so that it can be reworded (I am happy to help provide input and make sure things are at the very least factual) seems like the best option right now, if you do not want to delete it instead.

@fireborn I would need to check with them to see what they're using nowadays. They've told us that options like RHVoice and eSpeak NG aren't actually usable in practice, and they are likely using Google's app for this for their day-to-day.

As far as maintaining your own build with something like eSpeak NG goes, I don't assume that it would differ a lot from bundling any other app in a custom GrapheneOS build. If someone wanted to do that, they should be able to do it with relative ease, but at the end of the day, the solution needs to be something we can actually ship in official builds.

@matchboxbananasynergy it does, but a guide in the mean-time on how to package it yourself would go a long way towards making the process at least doable. I don't know, I personally use espeak every day and don't really plan on using anything else. Espeak can reach higher speech rates than most other things while still remaining understandable, and I don't like tts options with inflection that changes in the way that neural tts does.

@fireborn We can consider this, we do have https://grapheneos.org/build today which guides you through making your own GrapheneOS build.