Status Update
Placement/reordering animations in lists: Available since 1.1.0
Placement/reordering animations in grids: Available since 1.2.0
Placement/reordering animations in staggered grids: Available since 1.5.x betas
Additions/removals animations: In progress
Comments
cl...@google.com <cl...@google.com>
an...@google.com <an...@google.com>
ra...@twinhealth.com <ra...@twinhealth.com> #2
This is a particularly hard device to come by - do you happen to have access to the device? If so could you provide us with the output of: adb shell dumpsys media.camera > info.txt
Thanks!
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #3
Stacktrace:
Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Can not get supported output size under supported maximum for the format: 34
at androidx.camera.camera2.internal.SupportedSurfaceCombination.getSupportedOutputSizes(SupportedSurfaceCombination.java:355)
at androidx.camera.camera2.internal.SupportedSurfaceCombination.getSuggestedResolutions(SupportedSurfaceCombination.java:197)
at androidx.camera.camera2.internal.Camera2DeviceSurfaceManager.getSuggestedResolutions(Camera2DeviceSurfaceManager.java:198)
at androidx.camera.core.CameraX.calculateSuggestedResolutions(CameraX.java:943)
at androidx.camera.core.CameraX.bindToLifecycle(CameraX.java:293)
at androidx.camera.lifecycle.ProcessCameraProvider.bindToLifecycle(ProcessCameraProvider.java:227)
Below are some findings based on our debugging
When Dex is connected
previewConfig.getMaxResolution() is returning "731x411" as maxSize.
Inside Preview.Builder.build() -> Default_MAX_resolution is set to "CameraX.getSurfaceManager().getPreviewSize()" which is 731x411
this is being picked as maxSize.
While rendering maxSize is 731x411 and minSize is 640x480 and below are available outputSizes
0 = {Size@11860} "4032x3024"
1 = {Size@11861} "3984x2988"
2 = {Size@11862} "4032x2268"
3 = {Size@11863} "3024x3024"
4 = {Size@11864} "2976x2976"
5 = {Size@11865} "3840x2160"
6 = {Size@11866} "3264x2448"
7 = {Size@11867} "4032x1960"
8 = {Size@11868} "2880x2160"
9 = {Size@11869} "3264x1836"
10 = {Size@11870} "2160x2160"
11 = {Size@11871} "2560x1440"
12 = {Size@11872} "2224x1080"
13 = {Size@11873} "2048x1152"
14 = {Size@11874} "1920x1080"
15 = {Size@11875} "1440x1080"
16 = {Size@11876} "1088x1088"
17 = {Size@11877} "1280x720"
18 = {Size@11878} "1024x768"
19 = {Size@11879} "1056x704"
20 = {Size@11880} "960x720"
21 = {Size@11881} "960x540"
22 = {Size@11882} "720x720"
23 = {Size@11883} "800x450"
24 = {Size@11884} "720x480"
25 = {Size@11885} "640x480"
26 = {Size@11886} "352x288"
27 = {Size@11887} "320x240"
28 = {Size@11888} "256x144"
29 = {Size@11889} "176x144"
and couldn't find any size in this range.
When Dex not connected
minsize = 640x480
maxsize = 1920x1080
0 = {Size@11836} "4032x3024"
1 = {Size@11837} "3984x2988"
2 = {Size@11838} "4032x2268"
3 = {Size@11839} "3024x3024"
4 = {Size@11840} "2976x2976"
5 = {Size@11841} "3840x2160"
6 = {Size@11842} "3264x2448"
7 = {Size@11843} "4032x1960"
8 = {Size@11844} "2880x2160"
9 = {Size@11845} "3264x1836"
10 = {Size@11846} "2160x2160"
11 = {Size@11847} "2560x1440"
12 = {Size@11848} "2224x1080"
13 = {Size@11849} "2048x1152"
14 = {Size@11850} "1920x1080"
15 = {Size@11851} "1440x1080"
16 = {Size@11852} "1088x1088"
17 = {Size@11853} "1280x720"
18 = {Size@11854} "1024x768"
19 = {Size@11855} "1056x704"
20 = {Size@11856} "960x720"
21 = {Size@11857} "960x540"
22 = {Size@11858} "720x720"
23 = {Size@11859} "800x450"
24 = {Size@11860} "720x480"
25 = {Size@11861} "640x480"
26 = {Size@11862} "352x288"
27 = {Size@11863} "320x240"
28 = {Size@11864} "256x144"
29 = {Size@11865} "176x144"
and we have 12 available sizes in this range
Camera2DeviceSurfaceManager.java:: getPreviewSize()
mCameraSupportedSurfaceCombinationMap.get(cameraId).getSurfaceDefinition().getPreviewSize() = "1920x1080"
cameraId=0
ro...@gmail.com <ro...@gmail.com> #4
The issue root cause is that CameraX will default filter out sizes smaller than 640x480. For Preview, the max size will be limited to under display size. I checked the HW spec info for the issue related devices. Display size of FUJITSU F-04J/F-05J is 360x640. That will result int that no size exists in the conditions that is larger or equal to 640x480 and smaller or equal to 360x640.
A temporary workaround for this situation is to use Preview.Builder#setTargetResolution() to set a size smaller than 640x480 to bypass the problem.
For device FUJITSU arrowsM04, I checked its HW spec info and its display size I found is 1280x720. It seems that the problem should not exist in the device.
Could you confirm that the problem exist on arrowsM04 device? What will be the returned value when using Display#getRealSize to obtain the display size?
ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #5
> A temporary workaround for this situation is to use Preview.Builder#setTargetResolution() to set a size smaller than 640x480 to bypass the problem.
OK. I will try it.
> Could you confirm that the problem exist on arrowsM04 device?
We receive the crash report (Crashlytics) that this crash has occurred on arrowsM04.
We don't have this device so we can't confirm that the problem really exist on arrowsM04.
> What will be the returned value when using Display#getRealSize to obtain the display size?
We can't investigate it for the same reason.
Thank you.
sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #6
This issue happened on devices that the display size is smaller than 640x480. In original auto-resolution mechanism, supported sizes smaller than 640x480 will be default filter out.
The auto-resolution mechanism encodes the guaranteed configurations tables in CameraDevice#createCaptureSession(SessionConfiguration). It defines that the PREVIEW size is the small one of the device display size and 1080p. The PREVIEW size will be the maximal size limitation for Preview use case. The reason it limits the size to display size and 1080p is the stream output in display size or 1080p has been able to provide good enough preview quality. Therefore, auto-resolution mechanism will limit the selected size to be smaller than the small one of the device display size and 1080p.
With above two conditions, in this issue, all sizes smaller than 640x480 have been filter out, therefore, there is no size smaller than the display size 320x240 can be selected to use. And cause the exception.
Solution:
When the display size is smaller than 640x480, auto-resolution mechanism won't filter out those small sizes smaller than 640x480. This makes those small size be left and can be selected for the Preview use case on small display devices.
The solution has been merged and will be included in next CameraX release.
ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #7
Hello.
This crash still occurs.
- CAMERAX VERSION: 1.0.0-beta4
- ANDROID OS BUILD NUMBER: Android 7.1.1
- DEVICE NAME: FUJITSU F-02H
We receive following crash report from FUJITSU F-02H. So far We have received this crash report only from F-02H.
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
Can not get supported output size under supported maximum for the format: 34
androidx.camera.camera2.internal.SupportedSurfaceCombination.getSupportedOutputSizes (SupportedSurfaceCombination.java:349)
androidx.camera.camera2.internal.SupportedSurfaceCombination.getSuggestedResolutions (SupportedSurfaceCombination.java:197)
androidx.camera.camera2.internal.Camera2DeviceSurfaceManager.getSuggestedResolutions (Camera2DeviceSurfaceManager.java:198)
androidx.camera.core.CameraX.calculateSuggestedResolutions (CameraX.java:949)
androidx.camera.core.CameraX.bindToLifecycle (CameraX.java:351)
androidx.camera.lifecycle.ProcessCameraProvider.bindToLifecycle (ProcessCameraProvider.java:230)
(our application's package name).CameraFragment.bindCameraUseCases (CameraFragment.java:174)
ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #8
Could you help to provide the following information to clarify the issue?
1. Is the full name of the device Fujitsu Arrows NX F-02H that has a 1440x2560 display?
2. Please help to provide the supported output sizes of ImageFormat.PRIVATE that is obtained by StreamConfigurationMap#getOutputSizes(int).
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #9
- Is the full name of the device Fujitsu Arrows NX F-02H that has a 1440x2560 display?
Yes
- Please help to provide the supported output sizes of ImageFormat.PRIVATE that is obtained by StreamConfigurationMap#getOutputSizes(int).
Since we don't have this device, we'll try to collect this information in the next version of our app. The next version will be released later this month.
ro...@gmail.com <ro...@gmail.com> #10
Hello.
- Please help to provide the supported output sizes of ImageFormat.PRIVATE that is obtained by StreamConfigurationMap#getOutputSizes(int).
We have collected the output of the device where the crash occurs.
Device1
- Model : arrows Be F-05J
- Android Version : 7.1.1
- Supported output sizes of ImageFormat.PRIVATE
CameraId 0: 480x480
CameraId 1: 2048x1536 ,1920x1080 ,1280x720 ,960x720 ,640x480 ,320x240 ,176x144
Device2
- Model : Fujitsu arrows M04
- Android Version : 7.1.1
- Supported output sizes of ImageFormat.PRIVATE
CameraId 0: 480x480
CameraId 1: 2048x1536 ,1920x1080 ,1280x720 ,960x720 ,640x480 ,320x240 ,176x144
Additional Information
CameraX version : 1.0.0-beta04
We collect the supported output sizes by following code.
val errorString = buildString {
append("The supported output sizes of ImageFormat.PRIVATE: ")
(requireContext().getSystemService(Context.CAMERA_SERVICE) as CameraManager).apply {
cameraIdList.forEachIndexed { index, cameraId ->
val msg = if (VERSION.SDK_INT >= VERSION_CODES.M) {
val configurationMap =
getCameraCharacteristics(cameraId).get(CameraCharacteristics.SCALER_STREAM_CONFIGURATION_MAP)
val sizes = configurationMap?.getOutputSizes(ImageFormat.PRIVATE)
"CameraId $index: ${sizes?.joinToString(" ,")}"
} else {
"CameraId $index: This device version is under M."
}
append(msg)
}
}
}
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #11
sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #12
I tried to find the device specs and both 720x1280
size display. For the camera id 0 device, it is a different case that the display size is larger than 640x480
but the device only supports a 480x480
size. The case also caused the same IllegalArgumentException and was also fixed by 1.0.0-beta04
release. Before 480x480
size would be filtered out and then caused the IllegalArgumentException. After it was merged, the 640x480
size threshold was removed and then the 480x480
size would be kept and selected to use.
It looks like 1.0.0-beta04
release had been used to collect the supported sizes information. But the issue should have been fixed by 1.0.0-beta04
release. Did you only check the device model name to collect the supported sizes information or collect the information when the IllegalArgumentException issue happens again?
CameraX's 1.0.0-beta04
version. Maybe you can also consider to upgrade to the latest 1.0.0-rc01
version for your application. Thanks.
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #13
Did you only check the device model name to collect the supported sizes information or collect the information when the IllegalArgumentException issue happens again?
We collect informations only from the device on which IllegalArgumentException happened.
Our latest app uses CameraX version 1.0.0-beta10
and this issue still occurres.
However we don't receive crash report from Fujitsu arrows Be F-05J
or Fujitsu arrows M04
so far. (This doesn't mean this issue is fixed on these devices because our app is heavily rely on camera so these device's user wouldn't use our app anymore.)
Instead, we receive crash report from
- Model : Fujitsu F-03K
- Android Version : 7.1.2
- Supported output sizes of ImageFormat.PRIVATE
CameraId 0 : 480x480
CameraId 1 : 2048x1536 ,1920x1080 ,1280x720 ,960x720 ,640x480 ,320x240 ,176x144
om...@gmail.com <om...@gmail.com> #14
I missed some settings when I simulated the issue by robolectric test so that I was not able to reproduce it. Now, I can reproduce the issue if the device only supports one 480x480 resolution. I'm working on the solution and target to make it included in next release.
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #15
Branch: androidx-main
commit 69d15dff7bb857ee33a0f643ff42a0f8bc475ab2
Author: charcoalchen <charcoalchen@google.com>
Date: Fri Jan 08 18:30:03 2021
Fixed IllegalArgumentException issue happened when all preview supported sizes are smaller than 640x480 and display size is larger than 640x480.
Do not filter out sizes smaller than 640x480 when all preview supported sizes are smaller than 640x480 and display size is larger than 640x480.
Relnote:"Fixed IllegalArgumentException issue happened when all preview supported sizes are smaller than 640x480 and display size is larger than 640x480."
Bug: 150506192
Test: SupportedSurfaceCombinationTest
Change-Id: I2a63ce8e2ad42a9cc060c8635ac3603bf440b1ec
M camera/camera-camera2/src/main/java/androidx/camera/camera2/internal/SupportedSurfaceCombination.java
M camera/camera-camera2/src/test/java/androidx/camera/camera2/internal/SupportedSurfaceCombinationTest.java
sl...@gmail.com <sl...@gmail.com> #16
co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #17
jd...@google.com <jd...@google.com> #18
+1, can you please provide an update? :)
I think that list animations are pretty important and we can't always animate lists the way we want using the current APIs.
For instance, I'm trying to nicely animate a list whose items are updated every once in a while (some items are updated, some are removed, some are added). I tried to achieve this using an AnimatedVisibility
block for each item (see TransitionManager.beginDelayedTransition
in the traditional view system:
- when an item is added, we first expand the location of the item (and move the siblings and resize their ancestors) then fade it in.
- when an item is removed, we first fade it out then shrink the location of the item.
We can simulate something similar by adding some delays in the AnimatedVisibility
enter & exit transition specs, but it does not work well when removing and adding elements at the same time. This is illustrated in the video below: if my list has a single item and that I remove it but add a different item at the same time, then the following happens:
- The list grows because of the new item that is added. At the same time we fade out the item that is removed.
- The list shrinks because of the item that is being removed. At the same time we fade in the item that is added.
The ideal animation would just fade out the first item, then directly fade in the new item given that we don't need to shrink/grow the list.
It would be really great if this was handled out of the box by LazyColumn
/LazyRow
, for instance like this:
// Because we are using a MutableStateList
// or any other observable list, LazyColumn
// can keep track of the updates and animate
// its items in/out & move them accordingly.
val items = remember {
mutableStateListOf<Item>(/* some default list */)
}
LazyColumn {
items(items, { it.id }) { item ->
MyItem(item)
}
item {
Button(onClick = {
if (items.isNotEmpty()) {
// This will automatically animate given that we
// know exactly which item has been removed.
items.removeAt(0)
}
}) {
Text("Remove First")
}
}
}
We could also have an API that takes any kind of List<T>
+ DiffUtil.ItemCallback<T>
(or similar) :)
ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #20
in the example given, the list expands/shrinks for item insertion/deletion however it still does NOT fade in / fade out over time, if I'm not mistaken ?
Original diffutil animations have the short delayed fade in / fade out animations together with expansion / shrink when they're enabled on the recyclerview.
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #21
ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #22
ma...@quantox.com <ma...@quantox.com> #23
I have a question regarding item animations.
Some of my layouts are laid out like this (copied from docs as valid case):
LazyVerticalGrid(
// ...
) {
item { Item(0) }
item {
Item(1)
Divider()
}
item { Item(2) }
// ...
}
Since most of my items have Item and Divider inside item {} block, and .animateItemPlacement() should be put directly on content, what should I do in situation like this? Do I have to wrap Item and Divider in a Column, and then put animation on a Column or is there another way?
Thanks.
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #24
Can I ask for future to file separate bugs for questions like this as any new comment it this bug is currently sending an email to everyone who +1ed this bug. Thanks!
ra...@twinhealth.com <ra...@twinhealth.com> #25
ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #26
People are trying to come up with hacky answers on Stackoverflow without much success or any convenience.
this might not even be in backlog...
kl...@gmail.com <kl...@gmail.com> #27
ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #28
kl...@gmail.com <kl...@gmail.com> #29
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #30
il...@gmail.com <il...@gmail.com> #31
Can you please provide any status update / dates if possible?
rl...@gmail.com <rl...@gmail.com> #32
pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #33
jo...@google.com <jo...@google.com> #34
Hi, the Play store team is working on a feature which could greatly benefit from LazyColumn's addition/deletion animation support. Do you have an updated ETA that you can share with you? Thanks!
da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #35
ry...@google.com <ry...@google.com> #36
ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #37
its almost been 2 years now and even your internal teams at play store are asking for the item addition deletion animations, I was the first to bring this up in this thread first.
Is there any ETA on this ? It was a core functionality with DiffUtils which we shouldnt find workarounds as an implementation for Compose !
Could anyone from Google please share an ETA on this
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #38
Hello. We are currently finializing the design for the underlying mechanism we will be using for the disappearance animations. Sorry, we can't give exact estimations, but I can reassure you this feature is in works
mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #39
ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #40
bro
ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #41
I kind of agree with the last poster, if we all "bro" the developers every year or month to bump the thread, they might feel pressured to finish the removal/addition animations. Anyways, hang in there champ, they're probably almost done with that last piece of work
se...@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com> #42
it...@gmail.com <it...@gmail.com> #43
ta...@gmail.com <ta...@gmail.com> #44
Yesterday was the 4th year open anniversary of this issue lol
it...@gmail.com <it...@gmail.com> #45
mu...@gmail.com <mu...@gmail.com> #46
ph...@gmail.com <ph...@gmail.com> #47
ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #49
Branch: androidx-main
commit 36578696db7997ec73d1f81ae55e6b61951e7895
Author: Andrey Kulikov <andreykulikov@google.com>
Date: Tue Jul 04 16:14:07 2023
Item disappearance animation for lazy lists
We add support for the disappearance animation for lazy list items. The appearance animation was added as an internal api as part of aosp/2644850. We are using the new graphics layer implementation we recently added as part of aosp/2969199 and a set of preceding cls. This new graphics layer implementation is automatically counting the amount of usages for each layer, meaning that even when the layer is technically released by its main user, the underlying drawn content is not discarded until all the parent layers stop drawing it as well. It allows us to continue drawing the item being removed for the duration of disappearance animation. This logic was added in aosp/2967570.
As part of this cl we made both appearance and disappearance animation support public for LazyColumn and LazyRow. Support for other lazy layouts will be added in the next cls. Support for other types of animations is tracked in
Fixes: 150812265
Relnote: Item appearance and disappearance animation support was added into `LazyColumn` and `LazyRow`. Previously it was possible to add `Modifier.animateItemPlacement()` modifier in order to support placement (reordering) animations. We deprecated this modifier and introduced a new non-experimental modifier called `Modifier.animateItem()` which allows you to support all three animation types: appearance (fade in), disappearance (fade out) and reordering.
Test: new LazyListItemDisappearanceAnimationTest
Change-Id: I2d7f7a376cea26c0a36a59a4586d2705ab04cab7
M compose/animation/animation/integration-tests/animation-demos/src/main/java/androidx/compose/animation/demos/lookahead/LookaheadWithAnimateItemPlacement.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/api/current.txt
M compose/foundation/foundation/api/restricted_current.txt
M compose/foundation/foundation/integration-tests/foundation-demos/src/main/java/androidx/compose/foundation/demos/LazyColumnDragAndDropDemo.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/integration-tests/foundation-demos/src/main/java/androidx/compose/foundation/demos/ListDemos.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/integration-tests/foundation-demos/src/main/java/androidx/compose/foundation/demos/PopularBooksDemo.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/integration-tests/lazy-tests/src/androidTest/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/list/LazyListItemAppearanceAnimationTest.kt
A compose/foundation/foundation/integration-tests/lazy-tests/src/androidTest/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/list/LazyListItemDisappearanceAnimationTest.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/integration-tests/lazy-tests/src/androidTest/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/list/LazyListItemPlacementAnimationTest.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/integration-tests/lazy-tests/src/androidTest/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/list/LazyListTest.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/samples/src/main/java/androidx/compose/foundation/samples/LazyDslSamples.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/LazyItemScope.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/LazyItemScopeImpl.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/LazyList.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/LazyListItemAnimator.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/LazyListMeasure.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/LazyListMeasuredItem.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/grid/LazyGridItemPlacementAnimator.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/grid/LazyGridItemScopeImpl.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/layout/LazyLayoutAnimation.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/staggeredgrid/LazyStaggeredGridItemPlacementAnimator.kt
M compose/foundation/foundation/src/commonMain/kotlin/androidx/compose/foundation/lazy/staggeredgrid/LazyStaggeredGridItemScope.kt
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #50
Item appearance and disappearance animation support was added into LazyColumn
and LazyRow
. Previously it was possible to add Modifier.animateItemPlacement()
modifier in order to support placement (reordering) animations. We deprecated this modifier and introduced a new non-experimental modifier called Modifier.animateItem()
which allows you to support all three animation types: appearance (fade in), disappearance (fade out) and reordering.
This change is expected to be released as part of 1.7.0-alpha06
release.
Port of this modifier into lazy grids is tracked here:
To staggered grids here:
Support of other animation types aside of fade in/fade out is tracked here:
ca...@gmail.com <ca...@gmail.com> #51
Failed to transform lifecycle-livedata-core-2.8.0-alpha04.aar (androidx.lifecycle:lifecycle-livedata-core:2.8.0-alpha04) to match attributes {artifactType=android-dex, asm-transformed-variant=NONE, dexing-enable-desugaring=true, dexing-enable-jacoco-instrumentation=false, dexing-is-debuggable=true, dexing-min-sdk=26, org.gradle.category=library, org.gradle.dependency.bundling=external, org.gradle.libraryelements=aar, org.gradle.status=release, org.gradle.usage=java-runtime}.
Caused by: [CIRCULAR REFERENCE: java.lang.NullPointerException]
When I try to use 1.7.0-alpha06, any recommendation?
ry...@google.com <ry...@google.com> #52
@
lo...@gmail.com <lo...@gmail.com> #53
Hello, in the doc, under the heading "Item animations", the last sentence that references this issue should be changed, or removed:
It still says:
Aside from reorderings, item animations for additions and removals is currently in development. You can track the progress in issue
. 150812265
jo...@google.com <jo...@google.com> #54
Thank you for letting us know! We've updated the documentation page :)
Description
Placement/reordering animations in lists: Available since 1.1.0
Placement/reordering animations in grids: Available since 1.2.0
Placement/reordering animations in staggered grids: Available since 1.5.x betas
Additions/removals animations: In progress