About usersetting for add-on using Google Apps Script API [74048155]

Obsolete

Feature Request

Status Update

No update yet.

Description

ka...@gmail.com

created issue #1

Mar 2, 2018 12:20AM

- A description of the issue:
When the add-on which uses some Google APIs is installed, the scopes are authorized and users can use the APIs. When the API is Google Apps Script API (

https://developers.google.com/apps-script/api/reference/rest/), the scopes are authorized when the add-on is installed. But it was found that Google Apps Script API cannot be used. The reason is that the switch of this page is turned off.

The page is

https://script.google.com/home/usersettings

When the switch is turned on, Google Apps Script API can be used.

Can this switch be turned on when the add-on is installed? Because I thought that the operation of switch leads to put a burden on users.

## Reference :
-

https://developers.google.com/apps-script/api/reference/rest/
-

https://script.google.com/home/usersettings

Comments

ti...@google.com <ti...@google.com> #2Apr 23, 2018 01:39PM

I guess hidden should just be defined. Meaning, right now, hidden should just defined as "whether this fragment was hidden as part of a transaction". Hidden is not equivalent with visibility. I think that's where the confusion comes from.

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #3Apr 23, 2018 10:29PM

We have passed this to the development team and will update this issue with more information as it becomes available.

ti...@google.com <ti...@google.com> #4Jun 18, 2018 11:13PM

Yeah, I'm seeing this issue as well, currently this is the workaround that I've come up with:

// This method is called when hide()/show() methods are called on the transaction. Unfortunately Android doesn't
// propagate it to the child fragments (even though their visibility is affected by the parent visibility), so we
// do it manually.
override fun onHiddenChanged(hidden: Boolean) {
super.onHiddenChanged(hidden)
childFragmentManager.fragments.forEach { it.onHiddenChanged(hidden) }
}

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #5Jun 18, 2018 11:34PM

@4 That actually won't technically fix as isHidden() will technically mismatch with the state passed into the child fragment. Each child fragment legitimately needs to have their state set to hidden.

ti...@google.com <ti...@google.com> Aug 30, 2018 08:27PM

Assigned to ap...@google.com.

me...@gmail.com <me...@gmail.com> #6Sep 11, 2019 10:46PM

Yeah, I realized that as I kept working further on it. Nevermind that solution, it doesn't work.

jp...@google.com <jp...@google.com> #7May 15, 2024 10:15PM

Status: Won't Fix (Obsolete)

@6 I don't know what the ramifications are, but when you iterate, you can save the "currentState" and then hide them all via a transaction. When restoring to visible, restore to the original state.