Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Supported Android versions #2026

Closed
AndyScherzinger opened this issue Jan 22, 2018 · 15 comments
Closed

Supported Android versions #2026

AndyScherzinger opened this issue Jan 22, 2018 · 15 comments
Labels
needs info Waiting for info from user(s). Issues with this label will auto-stale.

Comments

@AndyScherzinger
Copy link
Member

Looking at the actual Play store stats and the offline discussions I'd like to raise this topic:
Which Android versions should we support?

Right now we support 4.0.x - 8.x (aka latest)

The Play store stats for the bottom ranking Android versions are:

  • Android version - active devices (total) - active devices (%)
  • Android 4.4 - 5,928 - 3.9%
  • Android 4.2 - 1,152 - 0.8%
  • Android 4.1 - 865 - 0.6%
  • Android 4.3 - 532 - 0.4%
  • Android 4.0.x - 229 - 0.2%

This adds up to 5,9 percent or >8000 devices.

I suggest to drop 4.0.x (no proper font support) at least or even 4.1 (no proper RTL support).
To be discussed could be to drop all of the above mentioned and go for minimum version Android 5.

In any case I would vote for doing this after 3.1 hoping that E2E will then be shipping increment 2 and we have the second release with Nc13 support, so people could still use that release until Nc14 comes out (roughly a year) until then 4.x numbers should be even lower.

What do you think @tobiasKaminsky @mario @nextcloud/android ?

@AndyScherzinger AndyScherzinger added the needs info Waiting for info from user(s). Issues with this label will auto-stale. label Jan 22, 2018
@mario
Copy link
Contributor

mario commented Jan 22, 2018

Like I mentioned...

  1. 4.x doesn't support many of the modern SSL ciphers, including those used by the push infrastructure
  2. At least 4.1 crashes on bunch of occasions (say, when you try to open the sidebar). I assume same is true for all other 4.x.
  3. Bunch of provisions in the code don't even work properly even if they're meant for 4.x

I vote for removing 4.x in 3.0.

@mario
Copy link
Contributor

mario commented Jan 22, 2018

To summarize, rather no support than the current level of support. None of us tests on 4.x so it's broken beyond repair.

@mario
Copy link
Contributor

mario commented Jan 22, 2018

In addition, the UI is broken.

@tobiasKaminsky
Copy link
Member

I tried 4.4.2 on my S3 Neo and it is working really great, even AutoUpload :-)
4.1:

  • weblogin looks weird -> nothing we can do
  • drawer indeed crashes if you click on the "open" button, if you swipe to the right it is working.

As of ssl3 problems: this must be a "problem" with our push server as the connection to my server is working.

I'll give it a try :-)

@AndyScherzinger
Copy link
Member Author

@tobiasKaminsky can you provide me with a stack trace for the drawer crash?

@tobiasKaminsky
Copy link
Member

SSL3: according to ssl labs our current ssl ciphers are not supported for <4.4.

So for me the only remaining "real" problem is that opening drawer is crashing.

@tobiasKaminsky
Copy link
Member

I found the cause of crashing drawer: #2028

@AndyScherzinger
Copy link
Member Author

@tobiasKaminsky nice, merged.

@tobiasKaminsky Can you comment on removing support for certain Android versions + Nc App release version? Basically there are to opinions at the moment (a third is of course welcome 😁 ):

  • Mario: With release 3.0.0 the App is Android 5+
  • Andy_: With release 3.2.x the App is Android 4.2+

@AndyScherzinger
Copy link
Member Author

AndyScherzinger commented Jan 23, 2018

I would also agree to Release 3.2.x is Android 5+ since then (if everything goes according to plan with 3.2) we would have shipped Nc13 support and E2E M2 to all users and then made the cut after that.

...And yes I know 4.4. has been release October 31, 2013 😋

@tobiasKaminsky
Copy link
Member

As long as we do not have to (e.g. due to libs or something else), I think we should keep the min api version as long as possible.
--> keep 4.2+

@AndyScherzinger
Copy link
Member Author

--> keep 4.2+

@tobiasKaminsky for app version >=3.2 or >03.0 ?!

@mario
Copy link
Contributor

mario commented Jan 23, 2018

Does that means you volunteer to test 4.x extensively before every release? :P

@tobiasKaminsky
Copy link
Member

Well, I did ;-)
At least the basics :-) And as long as there is a significant amount of users...yes.

@AndyScherzinger
Copy link
Member Author

No, why :P We shipped it in the past, it runs on RCs, enough for me to be honestly.

To me there is a difference between making it "available for" (as-in minSdk) and "supporting" (spending efforts). While yes that might mean that we

@tobiasKaminsky
Copy link
Member

I think we can close this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
needs info Waiting for info from user(s). Issues with this label will auto-stale.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants