Application as CameraXConfig.Provider is a bad idea [146923574]

Fixed

Bug

Status Update

No update yet.

Description

ey...@gmail.com

created issue #1

Dec 30, 2019 06:05AM

The release notes for alpha 7 say that we need to have our Application subclasses implement CameraXConfig.Provider

There should definitely be an alternative to this (I see CameraX.initialize but it's hidden). I have a highly modularized app, and I feel like I'm getting punished by having to leak a camera dependency into my app module just to implement this interface.

Comments

ey...@gmail.com <ey...@gmail.com> #2Dec 30, 2019 05:23PM

Hi Ed, Thank you so much for these suggestions. I've been reviewing them and merging them in. Hopefully it should be live. I've included a thank you note too in the article.

er...@google.com <er...@google.com> #3Jan 6, 2020 11:40PM

Reassigned to tr...@google.com.

Great! Thanks a lot, I'll look for the live updates soon!

er...@google.com <er...@google.com> #4Jan 13, 2020 11:28PM

Reassigned to bu...@google.com.

Bugjuggler: http://b/146071458 is fixed

bu...@google.com <bu...@google.com> #5Jan 13, 2020 11:28PM

Accepted by bu...@google.com.

Hi. I've received your bug and will wait for

b/146071458

to be fixed and then assign the bug to trevormcguire@google.com.

64...@gmail.com <64...@gmail.com> #6Jan 16, 2020 12:52PM

I also have a similar problem. I am using CameraX to build an Android library. So as a library developer, I have little access to the Application class and I cannot tell the consumers of my library to implement CameraXConfig.Provider. Really this is a bad API design and there should be an alternative ASAP. I am currently stuck at this point.

bu...@google.com <bu...@google.com> Jan 16, 2020 11:58PM

Assigned to tr...@google.com.

er...@google.com <er...@google.com> #7Jan 18, 2020 12:00AM

Hi there,

We're actively looking at this and will provide another method to initialize.

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #8Jan 25, 2020 03:31AM

Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev

commit 9015f3cff4053ad56b8b34b0708e3fe13945187c
Author: Trevor McGuire <trevormcguire@google.com>
Date: Thu Dec 05 18:21:19 2019

CameraX on-demand initialization through resources

Allows initializing CameraX without having to extend Application. A
default config provider can be specified through string resource or by
extending Application.

camera:camera-camera2 provides a default string resource which will be
included by default by the resource merger so users don't need to do
anything if they are ok with the default configuration.

Relnote: "Removed requirement that app must extend Application in order
to initialize CameraX. CameraX will now be initialized with a default
Camera2 configuration as long as the camera-camera2 artifact is included
in the application's build.gradle."

Bug: 146923574
Test: Integration tests are all successfully initialized and run
Change-Id: I58ff5c4440f9fec0afb3d9790f652dd91c2c84bd

A camera/camera-camera2/proguard-rules.pro
M camera/camera-camera2/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml
M camera/camera-camera2/src/main/java/androidx/camera/camera2/Camera2Config.java
A camera/camera-camera2/src/main/res/values/strings.xml
M camera/camera-core/src/main/java/androidx/camera/core/CameraX.java
A camera/camera-core/src/main/res/values/public.xml
A camera/camera-core/src/main/res/values/strings.xml
M camera/integration-tests/coretestapp/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml
D camera/integration-tests/coretestapp/src/main/java/androidx/camera/integration/core/CoreApplication.java
M camera/integration-tests/extensionstestapp/src/main/java/androidx/camera/integration/extensions/ExtensionsApplication.java
M camera/integration-tests/viewtestapp/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml
M camera/integration-tests/viewtestapp/src/main/java/androidx/camera/integration/view/ViewCameraXConfigProvider.java
M camera/integration-tests/viewtestapp/src/main/res/values/strings.xml

https://android-review.googlesource.com/1183436

er...@google.com <er...@google.com> #9Jan 27, 2020 11:33PM

Marked as fixed.

Hi All,

This is merged and will be available in the next release. Please take a look and let us know what you think. Thanks.

ey...@gmail.com <ey...@gmail.com> #10Jan 29, 2020 03:34AM

Is this in alpha-09 or will it be in the next one?

er...@google.com <er...@google.com> #11Jan 31, 2020 05:01PM

re:comment#10 - This will be in the next on - Alpha10. Thanks

so...@gmail.com <so...@gmail.com> #12Feb 24, 2020 05:26AM

I notices this issue now.
Well.. I also think this behavior is not so good.

What happens, if we want to use camerax in dynamic features module?
Is this really acceptable?

Rather, initialization using ContentProvider looks better.

Please re-consider on-demand initialization more. 🙇‍♂️

tr...@google.com <tr...@google.com> #13Feb 24, 2020 05:50AM

I notices this issue now. Well.. I also think this behavior is not so good.

As of alpha10, users no longer need to extend Application in order to initialize CameraX. Please let us know if this isn't working for you.

What happens, if we want to use camerax in dynamic features module?

I believe the current initialization mechanism introduced in alpha10 should work with dynamic features modules, but I'll admit I haven't yet tested it myself. If you have issues with dynamic features modules specifically, we would like to hear about it.

so...@gmail.com <so...@gmail.com> #14Feb 24, 2020 06:47AM

I mean different slightly.

Camera function is not primary in my application.
So I wanna reduce app size possible.
And I choose dynamic features module.
Then camerax libraries should be used in a dynamic features module only.

I understand, CameraX always needs config setup in application. (if extend Application exists)

If I wrong, so sorry.

tr...@google.com <tr...@google.com> #15Feb 24, 2020 08:35PM

I understand, CameraX always needs config setup in application. (if extend Application exists)

I think there may be some confusion here. To be clear, this behavior was changed in alpha10. Users no longer need to extend Application. CameraX will be initialized automatically if the user does not extend Application. Only in alpha07, alpha08, and alpha09 did users have to extend Application.

I believe this should work for dynamic feature modules as well, but have not yet had a chance to try it.

so...@gmail.com <so...@gmail.com> #16Feb 25, 2020 03:44AM

Ok, thanks for comments. :)

I will check again for dynamic features module with extended Application.
If some problem exists, then report through another issue.
Have a good day.

fa...@gmail.com <fa...@gmail.com> #17Feb 25, 2020 03:25PM

Thanks for this simplification.
However, you should correct the order of camera2 dependency in build.gradle, because camera-view & camera-lifecycle will override the androidx_camera_default_config_provider string resource in build time with theirs camera-core dependencies
Correct the docs also pls
dependencies {
// CameraX core library using the camera2 implementation
def camerax_version = "1.0.0-alpha10"
// If you want to use the CameraX View class
implementation "androidx.camera:camera-view:1.0.0-alpha07"
// If you want to use the CameraX Extensions library
implementation "androidx.camera:camera-extensions:1.0.0-alpha07"
// If you want to use the CameraX Lifecycle library
implementation "androidx.camera:camera-lifecycle:${camerax_version}"
implementation "androidx.camera:camera-camera2:${camerax_version}"
}