09-20-2013 08:01 AM
My app submission (my first) got rejected yesterday morning with this less than helpful message:
I'm testing your application on BlackBerry Z10. When I tap your application icon, it fails to launch and does not respond. Close by it self.
There is absolutely no info to go on. My app works fine on every device I've installed it on. I've used the exact same signed bar that I provided through the vendor portal, installed it on several Z10s, and it works, and I've never seen this problem before.
I asked for some clues: what is the OS version of the test unit, does it show the splash screen, does it ask for BBM permissions, is there a core file they can send, any debug terminal output, etc. No response yet.
Has anyone else had this problem, and if so, how did you debug it? Is there something "obvious" that I'm missing?
09-23-2013 02:35 AM
Other people have posted this same problem in the forums, but it usually comes about from them only having a simulator to test on and usually ends up being a 'writing to asset folder' problem.
Since you've tested on real devices there's nothing to go on here to debug.
Hopefully by me responding it gives a second chance that someone from BlackBerry will read this and try and get you a better response or a second test.
If you want someone independant to test it you can send me your app and I'll see if it runs (PM me).
Also try running you app on the different versions you say you support 10.0?, 10.1?, 10.2? (if you haven't aready) and see if you can replicate.
09-23-2013 09:33 PM
Thanks very much BBSJdev. At least I know I'm not alone!
I've made some tweaks to the app (fixing minor cosmetic things), and I'm going to resubmit it. I haven't found anything I've fixed that would change an "instant crash" behaviour, but I've got my fingers crossed that they'll at least let me know this time what it is.
If I get no further illumination, I may end up taking you up on your offer to independently test. Just to show what a noob I am (in this context, anyway) I don't know what "PM" is though--is that a direct contact through this forum?
09-24-2013 03:16 AM
09-26-2013 05:29 PM
another useful thing to do to possibly locate a potential issue is to ctrl + f search through the console.log while running the app in test mode
search for error and then search for failed.
Error will bring up errors in your qml files
failed will bring up something like Context: failed to target node by id ### (this means your in big trouble) i say that because the only way I have figured out how to find the id is to analyze every bit of your code until you spot what's wrong =( (in reality you can't get the id that i'm aware of)
09-26-2013 07:00 PM
As it turns out, my second submission passed. I didn't fix anything that should have made an effect. Added scrolling leader boards, fixed a couple of cosmetic issues, etc. Otherwise, the app was the same and I just crossed my fingers and resubmitted. And went through with no questions. So I still have no idea why it didn't make it through the first time, but I care a lot less now :-)
10-03-2013 08:16 PM
To continue the saga....
After the app was up for sale per my last post, I submitted a request to have my app tested against "Built for BlackBerry". The tester for BfB sent me a note that he couldn't get it to work and promptly removed the app from the store. Again, no clues. Coincidentally, it was the same guy who tested my app and rejected it first time, but I've been rejected by other testers in a similar way so I don't hold anything against him! After two more submissions, and precious little clues, I think that BBSJdev gave me the clue in a private message about there being different graphics on the different Z10 models. Thank you BBSJdev!
Here's what I've figured out--mostly through Wikipedia, since this level of detail doesn't seem to be on the BB site (or if it is, it's hidden pretty well).
There are 4 different Z10 hardware models. As BBSJdev said, Z10 model STL100-1 has a different GPU than models STL100-2 through STL100-4. 100-1 is based on a TI OMAP using a Vivante PowerVR GPU while 100-2 through 4 use a Qualcomm Snapdragon with a Adreno GPU. As it turns out, the STL100-1 is the model primarily sold in overseas markets that don't have LTE, whereas the others are sold in North America or Europe. I believe the bulk of the app certification testing is done in Malaysia or the Philippines. In both of those places, the STL100-1 is the dominating phone. Mine Z10 is an STL100-2 and all my beta testers are using either 2 or 4 too, so although I've had my app tested extensively on the Qualcomm, I have never tested it on the TI OMAP.
I use all custom OpenGL ES shaders. My assumption is that something in my shader code is causing the TI GLSL compile to barf. I have found had other subtle differences of what will work between the Z10 and Z30, as well as between the Z10 and the VMware simulator, so I'm pretty sure that this is what's happening even though I don't have direct proof.
I would love to fix whatever is causing the code to not run on the STL100-1, but I don't have access to one. So I resubmitted a new app bundle but this time I made sure to say that I only support the "Qualcomm GPU" and "Qualcomm GPU VZN", and removed the check next to "Imagination GPU". This time, it sailed through.
Maybe they don't run into people doing C++ with raw OpenGL ES 2.0 too often. I have provided my suggestions on how they could improve the testing process, and what things they could look out for developers who are submitting apps. If you're having issues similar to mine, hopefully limiting the available models on will do the trick!
10-03-2013 08:45 PM - edited 10-03-2013 08:46 PM
Great to hear that you have potentially located the issue!
Thanks for letting them know how they could improve the process(hopefully they listen), I've been doing this for the past few weeks with a few area's of the review process as there is major flaws & discrepancies.
It is rather disppointing that instead of telling developers hey you're having an issue with only this particular device they just boot the app from the store without any clear indication as to what they think is wrong or where they experienced the issue.