The Google Market team is very responsive to requests for transferring your
app to a
different account.
I don't believe that, simple as that.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Android Developers group.
To post to this group, send email to
Despite of your beliefs and as a matter of fact, they were in my case.
Cheers, Michael
mictale.com/ms
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Android Developers group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe
The Google Market team is very responsive to requests for transferring
your app to a different account.
Did the app use the licensing library? If so, I imagine that the process
wouldn't be quite so simple as asking the Google team to move it. Wouldn't
it involve a new .apk file that used the
This is true, it didn't use the Licensing API. Maybe that's the reason why
it went so smooth
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Android Developers group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this
LVL and in-app billing both require signature checks, which are tied to
a particular developer account (where you get the public key).
In both cases it's recommended that the key is not stored in the
application as is, but rather broken into obfuscated parts which are
assembled as needed.
Thanks, Kostya. I'm curious why the (public) publisher account key would
need to be obfuscated. What vulnerability would there be if the key were
publicly known?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Android Developers group.
To post to this group, send
The in-app billing docs says this:
http://developer.android.com/guide/market/billing/billing_best_practices.html
To keep your public key safe from malicious users and hackers, do not
embed it in any code as a literal string. Instead, construct the
string at runtime from pieces or use bit
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Ted Hopp ted.h...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Kostya. I'm curious why the (public) publisher account key would
need to be obfuscated. What vulnerability would there be if the key were
publicly known?
If someone replaces the key with their own by decompiling the
I am glad they were that responsive in your case. But please do not
generalize to the general case when it is so obvious that others have
already found them so much less responsive.
On Apr 29, 11:32 am, Michael Schollmeyer mich...@mictale.com wrote:
Despite of your beliefs and as a matter of
On Apr 28, 10:12 pm, Ted Hopp ted.h...@gmail.com wrote:
We are now writing an app that another company will brand and sell through
their
own publisher account.
*Signing the app*
The alternatives we see are: sign with our usual key; create a signing key
pair specific to the other company
Thanks, Chris. That seems obvious now that you point it out. :)
Is there any reason that they could not use an .apk file signed with our key
to publish to their Android Market account? Signing (and then running
zipalign) seems like the kind of work that should fall to us as the
developers,
11 matches
Mail list logo
