RE: Re: [DISCUSS] Android - New Minimum SDK?

2023-03-15 Thread Norman Breau

Thanks for your input Alex.

We too have started using min sdk 24 internally, and Chromium's latest 
tag is also using Min SDK 24:


https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/refs/tags/113.0.5653.1/build/config/android/config.gni#46

Since some time as been gone with no additional comments, I created a PR 
and summarize the discussion in the commit.
If there any other concerns, it should be commented on the PR, 
preferably before it gets merged.


PR: https://github.com/apache/cordova-android/pull/1571


On 2023/03/08 14:33:51 Alexandre Alves wrote:
> Just a small contribution... I see no problem in updating the minimum 
requirements as the percentage of users in 5.0 is currently marginal.

>
> In the applications we publish we have already updated the 
requirements for minSDK 24.

>
>
> 
> From: julio cesar sanchez
> Sent: 08 March 2023 12:05
> To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Android - New Minimum SDK?
>
> As far as I know the problems with upgradeable webviews on some device
> manufacturers affect all versions, not only 5.0. Some vendors decide 
to not

> make it updatable, and others use their own implementation instead of the
> system one.
>
> Anyway, I’m ok with 24
>
> El El mié, 8 mar 2023 a las 1:49, Norman Breau
> escribió:
>
> > I'm fine with min SDK 24. I do think however we should support
> > the factory webview version (based on AOSP) instead of picking a chrome
> > version number, purely because that isn't very enforceable (Could lead
> > to poor app user experience).
> > But if required we can discuss that further in another thread since 
it's

> > kind of off-topic to Min SDK.
> >
> > I also agree that if we are picking Min SDK numbers, we should pick the
> > base (e.g. Support Android 7.0+ instead of 7.1+).
> > If I recall correctly, it was chosen for Android 5.1 purely because
> > there was known issues regarding upgradeable webviews on some device
> > manufacturers with Android 5.0.
> >
> > FYI I skipped API 25 because there was a lack of data points.
> >
> > On 2023-03-07 7:55 p.m., julio cesar sanchez wrote:
> > > Any other opinions about it?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > El jueves, 8 de diciembre de 2022, julio cesar sanchez <
> > > jcesarmob...@gmail.com> escribió:
> > >
> > >> I was going to propose to bump the minSDK to 23 since we have 
been in 22
> > >> for a few versions, but I think going to 27 is too much and 
would make

> > >> users to not update or to move to something else.
> > >>
> > >> The truth is, with google support libraries we won't really be 
cleaning

> > up
> > >> that much code since the support libraries (android x core and such)
> > take
> > >> care of that.
> > >> cordova-android has 2 SDK_INT version checks, one for N and 
another for

> > M,
> > >> statusbar plugin has one for M, camera plugin has one for 28,
> > inappbrowser
> > >> has one for O.
> > >> We probably have more code for supporting old cordova versions 
(in the

> > >> plugins) that probably nobody uses than for supporting old android
> > versions.
> > >> BTW, you missed Android 7.1 (SDK 25).
> > >>
> > >> Also, I wouldn't go with Android 8.1, in any case I would choose 
8.0, it

> > >> was weird when we went with Android 5.1 instead of 5.0 or 6.0 as the
> > code
> > >> to support it was basically the same as for supporting 5.0.
> > >> And related to that, I would count minor versions as one major, so
> > Android
> > >> 8 should be 8.0 and 8.1, so the usage would be 8.5%, and Android 
7 (7.0

> > and
> > >> 7.1) would be close to the 5% threshold. So we should go to 
minSDK 24

> > tops.
> > >>
> > >> We can also do as Capacitor does and say that we support Chrome 
60+ (or
> > >> the version we decide), so if people use an emulator where the 
default
> > >> version is older, it's not supported despite the Android version 
is. But
> > >> for real devices, the % of out of date WebViews is much much 
smaller.

> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> El jue, 8 dic 2022 a las 16:59, Norman Breau ()
> > >> escribió:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi Apache Cordova community,
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm writing to propose that we increase our Minimum SDK on our next
> > >>> major release of cordova-android
> > >>> and I wanted to get a feel of the Cordova community of what a 
new good

> > >>> target to be, should we increase
> > >>> the minimum SDK.
> > >>>
> > >>> First I wanted to link a resource for the Android OS market 
share by

> > >>> Android Version[1].
> > >>>
> > >>> Based on November 2021-2022 the data summarized as follows:
> > >>>
> > >>> Android 5.1 (API 22) - 1.32%
> > >>> Android 6.0 (API 23) - 2.45%
> > >>> Android 7.0 (API 24) - 2.64%
> > >>> Android 8.0 (API 26) - 2.61%
> > >>> Android 8.1 (API 27) - 5.89%
> > >>> Android >= 9.0 (API 28+) - 9% or greater
> > >>>
> > >>> It's desirable to drop old versions eventually because maintaining
> > >>> backwards support can be difficult, particularly when Android
> > introduces
> > >>> new systems where it may only be ava

Re: March board report

2023-03-15 Thread Jesse
Yeah, good points.

For the question of sending it to the list, I think the answer of, 'We are
using github discussions now ...' should be sufficient.
On the second point, this to me is just anecdotal, and I don't think it
requires a response, but if you would like to add something we can.

Cheers,
  Jesse


On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 12:01 AM Niklas Merz  wrote:

> Thanks Jesse!
>
> The board had feedback we might want to address last time:
>
> >cd: Thank you very much for replying to my question and for at least
>  >addressing the issues ... would it be possible to send that
>  >digest to the dev-list? I doubt any person familiar would know
>  >where to look.
>
> This is about the slack digest. As we are using GitHub discussions more
> and more it's not that important and we could think about closing Slack?
> Let's start a discussion about that.
>
>  >rbowen: At the recent DroidCon Android developers conference in
>  >Kenya, I was unable to find any developers who were aware of
>  >Cordova. I encourage you to submit some talks to regional
>  >mobile developer events to increase awareness of your
>  >platform.
>
> Do we have anything to say about that. I will be speaking at a local
> meetup in June but the talk is mostly about contributing to OSS in
> general. Cordova will be mentioned as an example why it's important to
> give back.
>
> Kind regards
> Niklas
>
> On March 15, 2023, Jesse  wrote:
> > I have posted the draft of this quarter's report.
> > https://github.com/apache/cordova-apache-board-
> > reports/blob/master/2023/03.md
> >
> > Let me know if there is anything you would like to add/change either
> > here
> > or as a comment or pr.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >  Jesse
>


Re: March board report

2023-03-15 Thread Niklas Merz
Thanks Jesse!

The board had feedback we might want to address last time:

>cd: Thank you very much for replying to my question and for at least
 >addressing the issues ... would it be possible to send that
 >digest to the dev-list? I doubt any person familiar would know
 >where to look.

This is about the slack digest. As we are using GitHub discussions more
and more it's not that important and we could think about closing Slack?
Let's start a discussion about that. 

 >rbowen: At the recent DroidCon Android developers conference in
 >Kenya, I was unable to find any developers who were aware of
 >Cordova. I encourage you to submit some talks to regional
 >mobile developer events to increase awareness of your
 >platform.

Do we have anything to say about that. I will be speaking at a local
meetup in June but the talk is mostly about contributing to OSS in
general. Cordova will be mentioned as an example why it's important to
give back.

Kind regards
Niklas

On March 15, 2023, Jesse  wrote:
> I have posted the draft of this quarter's report.
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-apache-board-
> reports/blob/master/2023/03.md
>
> Let me know if there is anything you would like to add/change either
> here
> or as a comment or pr.
>
> Cheers,
>  Jesse