search

LogmeinRescue / iOS-SDK

Rescue In-App Support iOS SDK
http://secure.logmeinrescue.com/welcome/webhelp/EN/SDKi/MobileSDK/c_riossdk_overview.html
Other
6 stars 7 forks source link

Optionally include CoreBluetooth #73

Open jamesdownsjr2913 opened 2 years ago

jamesdownsjr2913 commented 2 years ago

Testing device: iPhone 11 on iOS 14.5 LMI SDK version: 5.11

Currently, according to the documentation, the bluetooth permission is required as bluetooth is used to "send information about the device" (https://github.com/LogmeinRescue/iOS-SDK/wiki/Requirements).

Can CoreBluetooth be included optionally based on some condition (existence of NSBluetoothAlwaysUsageDescription key?) for consumers of the SDK that do not want to implicitly require this permission in the application (see https://github.com/LogmeinRescue/iOS-SDK/issues/72 that the permission is not silent for a user)

(Could be dependent on https://github.com/LogmeinRescue/iOS-SDK/issues/74 to know if the information being sent is critical to LMI or not)

jamesdownsjr2913 commented 2 years ago

From the response on #74, it appears that the information sent to the agent regarding "Bluetooth" isn't necessarily critical and is something they can easily ask the user. In that case, does this request seem agreeable or is there an aspect of the CoreBluetooth functionality that is more essential as part of the SDK flow?

I understand that it might be somewhat complex to dynamically include the Bluetooth library based on some condition (e.g., the existence of the key as the example above). If that is not possible, if the condition were more manual would this potentially be more viable (e.g., the consumer has to include CoreBluetooth as a framework, not this SDK)

exceptioncatcher91 commented 2 years ago

Hi @jamesdownsjr2913,

We do not plan to modify this flow currently, but the next release might contain this modification.

Daniel

jamesdownsjr2913 commented 4 months ago

Following up @exceptioncatcher91 Is this behavior change something that may still be looked in to or should we just have this closed as not expected to be included at any point for now?