Minimum SDK

[arturdryomov]

Is there any reason to not support ICE_CREAM_SANDWICH? Yep, I know about @minSdkVersion and that “pure” ICS is not on the grid for a while. Isn’t it technically possible to support OS down to FROYO (mostly because of the Log#wtf, otherwise it can go lower)?

[JakeWharton]

No one has given a compelling argument other than "because you can". Why
should support be added for this API level no one is using?

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015, 3:33 PM Artur Dryomov notifications@github.com
wrote:

Is there any reason to not support ICE_CREAM_SANDWICH
https://developer.android.com/reference/android/os/Build.VERSION_CODES.html#ICE_CREAM_SANDWICH?
Yep, I know about @minSdkVersion https://twitter.com/minsdkversion and
that “pure” ICS is not on the grid
https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html for a while.
Isn’t it technically possible to support OS down to FROYO
https://developer.android.com/reference/android/os/Build.VERSION_CODES.html#FROYO
(mostly because of the Log#wtf, otherwise it can go lower)?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#98.

[timrae]

If you can, why wouldn't you? There are a reasonably large number of people in 3rd world countries that are using gingerbread devices, and some developers have chosen to try to make our apps available to these people. 3% is still >30 million devices; I wouldn't call that "no one".

[timrae]

The number of combined devices on Gingerbread or ICS is actually exactly the same as the number of combined devices with Small or Xlarge screens (7.2%). According to your reasoning, maybe you should set the following in your library's manifest as well, because "no one" is using these devices :p

<supports-screens android:smallScreens="false"
                  android:xlargeScreens="false"/>

[JakeWharton]

Agreed. The next version will not support either of those screen sizes as well.

[timrae]

lol are you being serious?

[arturdryomov]

@JakeWharton You are right. I have no other reasons than “beauty” with supporting “original” ICS. But this is is highly questionable, so yeah, supporting ancient and forgotten versions is not worth it. Thanks!

[arturdryomov]

References #93.

BTW, if anyone looking at this—the weirdest and rarest version I saw across all apps I have access to is 3.2. No signing of 4.0 at all. I have no idea where it vanished, most likely it was shipped on Galaxy Nexus only and updated to 4.0.3 immediately. Google does not even provide factory images for 4.0, so just forget about it forever and ever.