Mailing-List: contact callback-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 03:03:38 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Stephen J Fuhry (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: <1723165733.87478.1342926218692.JavaMail.jiratomcat@issues-vm>
In-Reply-To: <1838972521.42560.1342112554562.JavaMail.jiratomcat@issues-vm>
Subject: [jira] [Comment Edited] (CB-1047) Android UUID can sometimes be
 undefined (or otherwise not unique) because of limitations in ANDROID_ID
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-1047?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13420092#comment-13420092 ] 

Stephen J Fuhry edited comment on CB-1047 at 7/22/12 3:03 AM:
--------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the feedback, Simon.

I'm really glad that you're having some of the same reservations that I am with that approach. I totally agree, this does not really belong in the "device" namespace. It belongs in an "install" namespace. You mentioned an "app variable.".. I haven't looked through the phonegap source for this, but I don't see this anywhere in the documentation any mention of an application object or anything like that.. can you point me in the right direction?

I'm happy to do the work to get this out (at least on Android, might be able to coerce a friend to do the iOS portion, but we'll see).. so just point me to where this stuff should go and I'll submit another pull request.

Oh, and in terms of what happens when you reinstall and all that.. yeah, that's a whole other issue. I'll take a look in the morning at some other code I wrote that implements this same strategy.. yeah, you're totally right, there needs to be a strong definition of what this unique id _really_ represents.
                
      was (Author: fuhrysteve):
    Thanks for the feedback, Simon.

I'm really glad that you're having some of the same reservations that I am with that approach. I totally agree, this does not really belong in the "device" namespace. It belongs in an "install" namespace. You mentioned an "app variable.".. I haven't looked through the phonegap source for this, but I don't see this anywhere in the documentation any mention of an application object or anything like that.. can you point me in the right direction?

I'm happy to do the work to get this out (at least on Android, might be able to coerce a friend to do the iOS portion, but we'll see).. so just point me to where this stuff should go and I'll submit another pull request.
                  
> Android UUID can sometimes be undefined (or otherwise not unique) because of limitations in ANDROID_ID
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CB-1047
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-1047
>             Project: Apache Cordova
>          Issue Type: Wish
>          Components: Android
>    Affects Versions: 1.9.0
>            Reporter: Stephen J Fuhry
>            Assignee: Joe Bowser
>
> There are many documented situations where the following does not really return a unique identifier ([link to cordova source|https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cordova-android.git;a=blob;f=framework/src/org/apache/cordova/Device.java#l173]):
> {code:java}
> android.provider.Settings.Secure.ANDROID_ID
> {code}
> Would it make sense to implement a solution like this?
> http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2011/03/identifying-app-installations.html
> see also: http://stackoverflow.com/a/2853253/111033
> I've used the above mentioned solution in native Android applications without issue.
> It *might* make sense to offer this as a value completely separate from device.uuid.. there are many reports that some hardware vendors are actually populating ANDROID_ID with a manufacturer ID (i.e. ANDROID_ID returns a value, but it is not unique between devices of the same make / model! How deceptive.).
> Perhaps it could be offered as:
> {code:javascript}
> device.install_id
> {code}
> or something so that developers could opt-in to use it? This way it wouldn't break BC for those who are interested in maintaining device or install ids from previous versions. Then, you could get a guaranteed unique id by doing:
> {code:javascript}
> var deviceId = ('install_id' in device ? device.install_id : device.uuid);
> {code}

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira