Uploaded image for project: 'IGB'
  1. IGB
  2. IGBF-1728

Investigate what 3.0 App Release in Edit app actions do

    Details

    • Type: Task
    • Status: Closed (View Workflow)
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Done
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Labels:

      Description

      When a user submits an App and it gets approved, they are able to then log back into the App Store and edit their App page.

      The App page when in "edit" mode shows a link:

      • 3.0 App Release

      Task:

      • Find out: What is this and how does it work?
      • How should we modify it to support IGB Apps instead?

        Attachments

          Activity

          Hide
          prutha Prutha Kulkarni (Inactive) added a comment - - edited

          Here is what I found:
          Below are the steps taken for the investigation:
          a) Submitted a new app for approval.
          b) App is approved.
          c) Go to Edit>submit 3.0 App Release.
          d) Submit same version of the app.
          Actions performed by the system: message is shown that user cannot submit same app twice.
          e) If we try to submit a lower version of the same app.
          Actions performed by the system: It allows user to submit the lower version without giving any message.
          Expected behavior: It should not allow user to submit a lower version of the same app when a higher version is already uploaded. It should show a proper message for the same.
          f) If we submit a higher version of the app.
          Actions performed by the system: It accepts the higher version without admin approval. A mail is sent to the user with a message 'Your app has been submitted! You'll be notified by email when your app has been approved.'
          Clarification: Is it okay to submit a subsequent version of the same app without approval?
          Expected behavior: The message which is sent to the user should be changed to 'Your app has been submitted! ' instead.

          Show
          prutha Prutha Kulkarni (Inactive) added a comment - - edited Here is what I found: Below are the steps taken for the investigation: a) Submitted a new app for approval. b) App is approved. c) Go to Edit>submit 3.0 App Release. d) Submit same version of the app. Actions performed by the system: message is shown that user cannot submit same app twice. e) If we try to submit a lower version of the same app. Actions performed by the system: It allows user to submit the lower version without giving any message. Expected behavior: It should not allow user to submit a lower version of the same app when a higher version is already uploaded. It should show a proper message for the same. f) If we submit a higher version of the app. Actions performed by the system: It accepts the higher version without admin approval. A mail is sent to the user with a message 'Your app has been submitted! You'll be notified by email when your app has been approved.' Clarification: Is it okay to submit a subsequent version of the same app without approval? Expected behavior: The message which is sent to the user should be changed to 'Your app has been submitted! ' instead.
          Hide
          ann.loraine Ann Loraine added a comment -

          Regarding (e):

          I think it should be OK for a developer to submit an older version, since different versions may be compatible with different versions of the platform (IGB). They may have some users who need to use an older version of IGB for some reason, and the developer may wish to support these users.

          Regarding (f):

          This seems like a bug, but we need to dig a little deeper.
          Prutha - what user were you testing this as? Was that user a site admin?

          Show
          ann.loraine Ann Loraine added a comment - Regarding (e): I think it should be OK for a developer to submit an older version, since different versions may be compatible with different versions of the platform (IGB). They may have some users who need to use an older version of IGB for some reason, and the developer may wish to support these users. Regarding (f): This seems like a bug, but we need to dig a little deeper. Prutha - what user were you testing this as? Was that user a site admin?

            People

            • Assignee:
              prutha Prutha Kulkarni (Inactive)
              Reporter:
              ann.loraine Ann Loraine
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: