Fixed
Status Update
Comments
il...@google.com <il...@google.com>
ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #2
since these are in public API (:/) we need to do this in 1.2
jb...@google.com <jb...@google.com> #3
since it is already marked as deprecated, we can probably do it by now.
an...@google.com <an...@google.com> #4
Opening diff shortly
il...@google.com <il...@google.com> #5
Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev
commit d576cbdc911cba16638a44fd8223391a90a07ef7
Author: Mike Nakhimovich <digitalbuddha@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Tue Aug 11 09:30:34 2020
[GH] Hide deprecated internal API.
## Proposed Changes
* `RoomDatabase.java` has protected `mCallbacks` field which is leaking in the API docs, we should @Hide it.
## Testing
Test: Ran unit tests locally
## Issues Fixed
Fixes: 76109329
This is an imported pull request fromhttps://github.com/androidx/androidx/pull/61 .
Resolves #61
Github-Pr-Head-Sha: 6440daa3a63752c7f9d5ba2a390248cd85bc634f
GitOrigin-RevId: fe92d8466a59b44b218b6ca3cbd57dcda17992f7
Change-Id: Id599cdf5b02b32bdae0166266fb7da967598fe92
A room/runtime/api/current.ignore
M room/runtime/api/current.txt
M room/runtime/api/public_plus_experimental_current.txt
M room/runtime/api/restricted_current.txt
M room/runtime/src/main/java/androidx/room/RoomDatabase.java
https://android-review.googlesource.com/1396827
Branch: androidx-master-dev
commit d576cbdc911cba16638a44fd8223391a90a07ef7
Author: Mike Nakhimovich <digitalbuddha@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Tue Aug 11 09:30:34 2020
[GH] Hide deprecated internal API.
## Proposed Changes
* `RoomDatabase.java` has protected `mCallbacks` field which is leaking in the API docs, we should @Hide it.
## Testing
Test: Ran unit tests locally
## Issues Fixed
Fixes: 76109329
This is an imported pull request from
Resolves #61
Github-Pr-Head-Sha: 6440daa3a63752c7f9d5ba2a390248cd85bc634f
GitOrigin-RevId: fe92d8466a59b44b218b6ca3cbd57dcda17992f7
Change-Id: Id599cdf5b02b32bdae0166266fb7da967598fe92
A room/runtime/api/current.ignore
M room/runtime/api/current.txt
M room/runtime/api/public_plus_experimental_current.txt
M room/runtime/api/restricted_current.txt
M room/runtime/src/main/java/androidx/room/RoomDatabase.java
Description
Component used: Navigation Version used:2.3.0-alpha05
Devices/Android versions reproduced on: Emulator, Android 11 DP3
I'm trying out returning results from dialogFragments with the SavedStateHandle you provide in this latest versions. it works well, taking into account the "Additional Considerations" section advice, of observing the NavBackStackEntry lifecycle, so the weird stuff that happens of having the fragment and the dialog being resumed at the same time doesn't affect when we receive the result.
But, process death is problematic, first I encountered https://issuetracker.google.com/154405007
It's easy to fix once you know what's happening. But now the problem I'm seeing is that the lifecycle events do not work in the same way when process death has occurred and backstack state is restored.
Normally, what I see is this, on the currentBackStackEntry: onCreate -> onStart -> onResume -> (we open the dialog) -> onPause ... and then onResume again when we come back from the dialog. Everything is cool here.
But after process death, this happens: onCreate -> onStart -> onResume We never hit onPause, and so we never "come back" to onResume after dismissing the dialog. We will never receiver the ON_RESUME event again to get the result.
I'm not sure if this is a bug, or just a consequence of how the state restoration is done on the backstack, but it pretty much means that thishttps://developer.android.com/guide/navigation/navigation-programmatic#additional_considerations , won't always work.
I attach a minimal repo to reproduce this, just click on the dialog button, and on receiving a result on the first fragment a toast will appear. Now, if you go to dialog once again, leave the app, and trigger process death and return to the app, it won't work.https://github.com/MrMPN/NavEntryLifecycleMinRepo
It's not a common case I think, but given the info on the documentation, it was unexpected to see it fail like this.