Currently I have a new binary that has just been approved - (developer release)
And the team decided to make some UI changes.
Now, if we were to submit the updated binary.
If the update were to get rejected, is it possible for us to still release the binary that was previously approved (developer release)?
Basically, we are time constrained to release the product in 3 days, and we want to understand if squeezing in a update makes sense. Ideally, if possible, we don't want the customer to see the binary that is just approved but the new one.
If the update were to get rejected, is it possible for us to still
release the binary that was previously approved (developer release)?
Yes it is, since it has passed Apple approval according to Apple Review Guidelines. and the new version will not have replaced your already approved app.
I recommend requesting an Expedite Request.
Note that, if this were the case, anyone submitting an update would, in case of rejection, have their apps taken down.
Related
I am new to Corda. My question is not about any particular implementation, but more of an architectural question.
What happens during back chain validation if one of the nodes involved permanently dies and fails to respond? How is that transaction validated?
I have seen this issue that only talks about how of transaction volume could slow down validation. Does validation come to a grinding halt if one of the nodes fails permanently?
As per Corda webinar on Consensus, in the example that is 5 minutes into the video, the back chain is Charlie -> Dan -> Alice -> Bob. In this, if either Charlie or Dan are unavailable, the proposed transaction cannot be validated. The same webinar further says that this is not a problem in other blockchains such as Ethereum.
Applications that can foresee the need for a highly-available record keeper, can surely accommodate such a node during the design phase, as suggested by Adel Rustum.
However, a privacy-conscious application reluctant to leak information that is deployed globally, could suffer from many transaction-validation failures due to the vagaries of a wide-area network. Thoughts?
The short answer is, transaction verification will fail (if that node was the only node that had that transaction); and that's the point of using a DLT (or a blockchain). If you can't go back in the history of a certain block of data until genesis, then you can't verify how that block and its ancestors were created.
As for the issue that you referenced in your question; Corda Enterprise 4.4 introduced a new feature called bulk back-chain fetching, which allows modifying the way the transactions that are needed to verify a certain transaction are fetched. Previously it was depth first, now you can change that to breadth first and specify how many transactions you want to fetch in one call. More details in this video.
The back chain validation doesn't depend on the nodes who were part of the transaction in the past. The validation of the back chain is only done by those nodes who are part of the current ongoing transaction. The other nodes who were part of a past transaction that involves the evolution of a state in question don't need to be contacted (or stay online) while the back chain is validated.
Back chain validation only involves checking that all transaction which happened in the past on a particular state used as input in the current transaction is valid. The validity is checked by running the contracts again for those previous transactions. There is no real need to reach to the parties of a previous transaction.
However, you need to make sure that the parties involved in the current transaction are online and responding since you would need signatures from them to successfully complete the transaction.
From the documentation of 'Upload usage event' (https://westus.dev.cognitive.microsoft.com/docs/services/Recommendations.V4.0/operations/577ec1847270320f24da25b1), we can tie the event with the build id.
However, from Cognitive Service Recommendation API Upload Usage Event, it seems like I need to create a new build for the event to be considered.
Is that still true? If that's the case, what is the purpose of sending the build id in the usage event?
The usage events need to be tied to a particular model, not a particular build.
You will notice in the URL the location where the modelId is passed:
https://westus.api.cognitive.microsoft.com/recommendations/v4.0/models/{modelId}/usage/events
That just means that the next build you create for that model will take into consideration the new uploaded usage events. So, yes -- you do need to create a build after changing catalog and usage related information for that to be taken into consideration.
The only reason for the buildId to be passed as part of the usage event information is that it is helpful to get conversion metrics for a particular build. (i.e. Since you would be notifying the system when a purchase actually occurs).
NOTE: Please notice that the recommendations API will be deprecated on Feb. 15 2018 -- therefore I would advise you to use The Recommendations Solutions Template (http://aka.ms/recopcs) instead.
Thanks!
Luis Cabrera | Program Manager | Recommendations Team
I've nearly finished my lambda service for my smart home skill, and everything works great. The Echo is receiving my confirmations and correctly relaying their information. I'm now trying to build in error handling.
From the SHS API reference, there are a bunch of error messages listed that correspond to different circumstances. Are these errors supposed to change what Alexa says? Regardless of which one, if any, that I use Alexa just responds that the command doesn't work on that device. Right now I'm literally just using callback(err) and return the copy and pasted object from the API reference and still Alexa responds with the generic error.
It's easy to put in a bunch of constants to define error returns. It's harder to wire all of that into a firmware patch of a hardware device. Also, they only release an update to the SDK a few times a year. While they patch the hardware every couple of weeks.
Given that, I suspect that they put those error returns into the SDK to meet with a ship date with the SDK. More as placeholders than specific functionality. Over time, and if there is increased adoption of home skills, they will roll out updates to the hardware device that will take advantage of those returns.
My advice would be to use them. But not to expect there to be a difference right now. And don't mention differences in your documentation. If there is another place you can surface diagnostic information, you might want to do that so your customers can fix their problems.
I have a server that keeps 2 booleans. These booleans change every 15 seconds.
Whenever I wake my Apple Watch, I want the complication to show the current state. How can I do it withough exhausting the budget early on?
The best way would be to fetch the newest state into the complication whenever I wake my watch. The only possible way I see would be to poll the server (either directly or via my phone) every 15 seconds. The problem is that I'd soon use up all the allotted time.
It would be great if I could make the complication only update when the watch was woken up. Can that be done?
Is there a way to not fetch data unless you need it?
No.
By "waking the watch," you're speaking of activating the watch either by interacting with it, or by raising your wrist. Regardless of the manner, the watch can either wake to the watch face, or to the last activity (which is controlled by the Wake Screen setting).
If it wakes to the watch face, this is independent of your app, watch extension, or complication controller. There is no notification you can use to handle that scenario.
If it wakes to an activity, it may not be your activity. If it were your activity, all you could do would be to stop updating when your watch app was active.
Either way, there is no contingency to only update the complication when the watch is awake.
If you think about what you're asking, it runs contrary to Apple's guidelines, as users expect to glance at the watch face and already see current complication data. The system expects you to provide updates when the watch is not awake, so the information will be immediately visible when the watch does wake.
Updating Complication Data
Of the available update approaches, these won't handle your requirements:
PKPushTypeComplication push notifications
This would be ideal, if you were not updating frequently and constantly throughout the day.
Apple applies a daily limit to the number of pushes of this type that you send from your server. If you exceed the limit, subsequent pushes are not delivered.
Scheduled automatic updates
The issue here is that the minimum scheduled update interval is 10 minutes, so you wouldn't have current complication info for the remaining 9-3/4 minutes.
Scheduled updates are useful for apps whose data changes at predictable times. When a scheduled update occurs, ClockKit calls the requestedUpdateDidBegin or requestedUpdateBudgetExhausted method of your data source first.
These approaches might handle your requirements, but you'd have to try them and determine which one meets your needs.
Watch extension + background NSURLSession
This may place more of a drain on battery, but it would work even if not in range of the phone.
Manual update via WCSession transferCurrentComplicationUserInfo
If you're in range of your phone, the more likely approach would be for your phone to (always) poll your server, then provide constant updates.
When your iOS app receives updated data intended for your complication, it can use the Watch Connectivity framework to update your complication right away. The transferCurrentComplicationUserInfo: method of WCSession sends a high priority message to your WatchKit extension, waking it up as needed to deliver the data. Upon receiving the data, extend or reload your timeline as needed to force ClockKit to request the new data from your data source.
Note that complication transfers are budgeted in iOS 10. This approach would not work if you were performing large numbers of updates per day.
Having said all that, an alternate approach would be to monitor these booleans on the server side, and only send out a notification if there was a problem or change. You didn't explain exactly what these booleans indicate, but there are other approaches for monitoring, which would avoid you having to constantly poll a server (from your phone or watch).
If that's not an option, you really should consider either viewing the server data on your phone, or switching to a far less frequent update interval for your complication. Apple discourages such frequent updates, and even their own (stock or weather) complications are not updating several times a minute.
Update:
What if I only wanted to update the complication when user requested it himself(=clicked the complication)? He is not really interested in the state all the time.
Can you (only) update a complication when the watch awakes? No.
Can you update an extension when the extension awakes? Yes.
The user needs to consider what a complication is meant to be. It's designed to be regularly updated to show current information. There's no mechanism to not update the complication because the user is mostly not interested in knowing the state.
Could you tap on a complication to open its app? Yes. But the complication itself would be showing stale data, and the user would have to do more than raise their wrist to see current state.
If you consider what the user is asking, they're not describing a complication (which shows current state), but a way to see the current state when they request it.
That mechanism is different from a complication. They're really describing a Glance (or an app) which the user swipes up (or opens) to see.
If they want live updates, it can be done via WCSession updateApplicationContext.
Use the updateApplicationContext:error: method to communicate recent state information to the counterpart. When the counterpart wakes, it can use this information to update its own state. Sending a new dictionary with this method overwrites the previous dictionary.
The way that works is your phone sends background updates to the watch. The watch stores the most recent update, which will be available to it when your app or Glance wakes up. The user views the app or Glance, and it displays the most recent value which the watch stored. While open, it continues to update itself as new updates arrive. While closed (e.g., inactive, asleep), the watch stores the most recent update on behalf of your app or glance.
If the user doesn't need the app or glance to update itself every 15 seconds, then you wouldn't need to poll, and you could simply use a NSURLSession to fetch the current state when the extension awakes.
If you explain to the user that there's no way to update a complication when the user raises their wrist, and that they don't care about knowing the state all the time (which a complication is meant to do), then show them what a Glance can do, you'll find it far easier to accomplish what the user seems to want, ideally without unnecessarily draining the battery.
I'm a nascent coder creating a simple iOS app. I'm experimenting with coding push notifications for the first time and I have a simple question regarding the Parse Installation Object and a scenario where multiple users log on the same device (let's say a loner iPad at a library).
Based on the Parse documentation I've seen, when a user subscribes to a channel - let's say "The Giants" - it saves this info on the Installation Object. But if the user logs out and another user logs in, does Parse assume that we are to erase the previous channels? Should channels therefore be saved to the User class first, and only saved to Installation when a user logs in? And similarly how do we handle advanced targeting where I want to query Installation for a specific User objectId? Is the best practice to always leave the last user logged in listed as 'owner'/'user'?
If you find the library example impractical, also consider something like signing into your Spotify account on a friend's device in order to play a private playlist at a party. I know these are less common scenarios, but I want to make sure I know how to handle them.
I'm new to Push Notifications so I may be missing something fundamental here, but if any experienced developer can lend some advice as to how they handle this scenario, it would be greatly appreciated.
Store a reference to PFUsers when you save the installation. Add a field #"owner" and tag the pfuser to it.
After a user logs in, if they are not associated with the current installation, send an alert asking if they'd like to receive pushes on this device. If that's the case, resave and update the current installation. Otherwise leave it as is.
This is a tricky area, let me know what you come up with.
It's pretty rare that people will sign onto a service using someone else's phone, so I don't think its a huge issue if you want to just "see what happens" and if there's demand work it out.
I have 3 iOS apps using a single Parse application which supports push notifications for all 3 apps. I have a flag set on the project for the Release configuration for NDEBUG. I use #ifndef NDEBUG to set the boolean on a value I set on the current installation. This way it makes it easy to identify which installation that I can use for testing push notifications. I also use the appIdentifier value to filter to the application I am testing.
I also set other values as needed but these values are a good start.
if (debug) {
[currentInstallation setObject:[NSNumber numberWithBool:YES] forKey:#"debug"];
}
else {
[currentInstallation setObject:[NSNumber numberWithBool:NO] forKey:#"debug"];
}