For my, after read the google documentation, is clear than that is one of the exceptions allowed by google, i'm offering a network service so is a main feature to maintain that service up.
Reading the documentation at https://developer.android.com/training/monitoring-device-state/doze-standby.html : Doze and App Standby break the core function of the app About the benefits without wakelock: If doze is enabled: Network access is suspended. But if you request the permissions: An app that is whitelisted can use the network 2017-03-23 15:00 GMT+01:00 Michael Rogers <[email protected]>: > On 06/03/17 14:34, Nathan of Guardian wrote: > > For now, Orbot does prompt you to disable the battery optimization > > features for Orbot when you enable a hidden service. Otherwise, I think > > it is up to the app server/process itself to handle their own wake lock > > needs, depending on what kind of availability they are expected to have. > > > > ChatSecure/Zom already does quite a bit of wakelock management for > > instance, and so if we added a Ricochet, Briar or other protocol support > > into that stack, I wouldn't expect Orbot to directly handle it. > > > > Does that make sense? > > The situation with doze mode and app standby is far from clear to me, > even after a lot of digging, but it seems to me that whichever app holds > the wake lock also needs to request whitelisting, otherwise the wake > lock won't be honoured in doze mode. > > So if you think the wake lock should be held by the client app rather > than by Orbot (which I would agree with, because it puts the battery > blame on the client), then the client app should also request > whitelisting. I don't understand the benefit of Orbot requesting > whitelisting without also holding a wake lock. > > Another issue to consider is that apps have been removed from the Play > Store for requesting the REQUEST_IGNORE_BATTERY_OPTIMIZATIONS > permission, if Google decides that the permission isn't needed for "the > core function of the app" (see > https://commonsware.com/blog/2015/11/11/google-anti-trust-issues.html). > If a client app needs a hidden service and Orbot provides one, which of > them would Google consider to have a legitimate case for requesting the > permission? I have no idea, and frankly it's stupid that we even have to > worry about it, but such is the platform. > > Cheers, > Michael > > _______________________________________________ > List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev > To unsubscribe, email: [email protected] > >
_______________________________________________ List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev To unsubscribe, email: [email protected]
