[aerogear-dev] Android target and min SDK numbers

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[aerogear-dev] Android target and min SDK numbers

Summers Pittman
Following a spirited discussion on the IRC channel we have come up with
the following arguments for and against several minimum versions of
Android which we will support for 1.0

android-7 Éclair
For:
The TODO app currently compiles and runs on it

Against:
Older than cyber dirt.
Relies on some deprecated HTTP Cient APIs
More testing for not much more gain in market

android -8 Froyo
For:
We agreed on it before.
Gains us 15% of Android Play users

Against:
Still uses deprecated http libraries.
Lose out on some of the nicer things in Gingerbread
Can lower our minimum version in 1.0.1 if it passes QA
Old as cyber dirt

android-10 Gingerbread
For:
Majority of Android users still use this
Lots of good API's
"Default" version for many Android developers
Minimum version that the supported http libraries support

Against:
We lose the users from Froyo
We agreed on Froyo before
The library doesn't strictly need it.

My vote is for 10 with an eye to lower it to 8 shortly after 1.0 is
released.  This limits the number of platforms we have to test on to get
this out the door and doesn't affect our developers that much.
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Android target and min SDK numbers

tech4j@gmail.com

On Oct 26, 2012, at 10:10 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Following a spirited discussion on the IRC channel we have come up with
> the following arguments for and against several minimum versions of
> Android which we will support for 1.0
>
> android-7 Éclair
> For:
> The TODO app currently compiles and runs on it
>
> Against:
> Older than cyber dirt.
> Relies on some deprecated HTTP Cient APIs
> More testing for not much more gain in market

There is no way we're targeting 1.0 - that is just crazy talk!!

>
> android -8 Froyo
> For:
> We agreed on it before.
> Gains us 15% of Android Play users
>
> Against:
> Still uses deprecated http libraries.
> Lose out on some of the nicer things in Gingerbread
> Can lower our minimum version in 1.0.1 if it passes QA
> Old as cyber dirt
>

We did discuss this before, but also did not have the insight into the http stack differences/complications.

> android-10 Gingerbread
> For:
> Majority of Android users still use this
> Lots of good API's
> "Default" version for many Android developers
> Minimum version that the supported http libraries support
>
> Against:
> We lose the users from Froyo
> We agreed on Froyo before
> The library doesn't strictly need it.

By far the largest market share, and for much of what/who we will be targeting having a min version of 2.3 (api 10) seems prudent at first sight.  That said supporting back to Froyo might be good if the technical costs are not too high.

>
> My vote is for 10 with an eye to lower it to 8 shortly after 1.0 is
> released.  This limits the number of platforms we have to test on to get
> this out the door and doesn't affect our developers that much.

This seems like a very sensible approach for our first release!  We can target Froyo (depending on effort, or timing) after we 1.0 out.  Perhaps for a point or minor release.

+1

> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev


_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev