5 ms·

OP here. We're happy to endure a three-day review process, but if it's going to take that long, then there needs to be a way to schedule an app release. Today,

OP here. We're happy to endure a three-day review process, but if it's going to take that long, then there needs to be a way to schedule an app release. Today, Google has a "timed publishing" system for app updates, allowing you to submit an app update today and schedule it to go live on a future date (after successful review). We need the same system for new app releases. Apple, which also has a multi-day review process for new apps, allows you to submit an app for approval and then hold it for manual release. After approval, you push the button on release day, and the app goes live immediately. Also: surprising us with this on release day is really unprofessional of them. The "we'll take more time" warning banner doesn't show up until after you submit the app. There was no way to know we had to submit early until it was already too late to act.

squiggy22 7y ago
Started dipping my feet in app development recently. To get an app onto an Internal track for testing purposes..you still need to get 'reviewed'. literally a hello world app needs human review that takes 3 days. That blows my brain. Not open to the web. just testers. 3 days. painful. and imo. broken.
- dfabulich 7y ago
  Luckily, you only need to get internal track approval the first time. After that, you can deploy changes to your own team with fast, automated review. But, as my conversation with support showed, even after getting internal track approval, you'll need to wait another three days when you want to go live for production approval. ("It should be slightly quicker, but again we recommend three days just to be safe")
  - iainmerrick 7y ago
    There’s still a review process for the “internal” track even for an established app, and sometimes it gets held up. I think “internal” is a misnomer, it doesn’t seem to be handled any differently from a closed alpha channel.
- jiveturkey 7y ago
  how can they know? any app published on play store should have to be reviewed. if you just want internal testing, not open to the web, sideload it.
colechristensen 7y ago
Your post would benefit from focusing on the two real problems here * Lack of timed publishing feature * Lack of messaging about review until after submission The message isn't clear and people seem to be reacting to the three day process (not the problem) instead of the messaging and features around it.
- cannam 7y ago
  I thought the post was pretty clear on both of these things. I'm surprised that all the top-level comments here (at the time I write) are addressing only the longer review time - it seems clear enough that the real problem is that it's impossible to schedule a release properly.
  - gray_-_wolf 7y ago
    It's clear after reading the article, but imho the news title gives different impression.
  - Deimorz 7y ago
    So many people comment--on everything, not this post specifically--without reading anything more than the title of the HN post. They basically treat the title as a "topic suggestion" instead of reading the article itself. It's a pretty annoying behavior because it means that discussions often end up wildly off-topic or with a lot of comments missing the point, or just re-stating the exact same things that the article already said (often because people ask questions that the article answered, but they didn't read it). Unfortunately there's not really any good way to fix it. We had a big discussion about this same issue on Tildes recently too: https://tild.es/gjb https://tild.es/gjb
    - gtirloni 7y ago
      How about using a title that points to the real problem? "Google needs scheduled new app releases". Seems like a pretty good way to "fix" this, but I guess it wouldn't drive much traffic.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jayd16 7y ago
Expecting to flip a switch for an app rollout is an anti-pattern. There's going to be a pretty slow propagation no matter what the policy is.
- harrisonjackson 7y ago
  Very true. Even Apple's manual release can take 24 hours to be searchable in the app store. They do make this clear during the release process.
- zwily 7y ago
  But at least you can have a “not before” policy, which is something you can work with in your marketing plan.

squiggy22 7y ago

Started dipping my feet in app development recently. To get an app onto an Internal track for testing purposes..you still need to get 'reviewed'. literally a hello world app needs human review that takes 3 days. That blows my brain. Not open to the web. just testers. 3 days. painful. and imo. broken.

dfabulich 7y ago
Luckily, you only need to get internal track approval the first time. After that, you can deploy changes to your own team with fast, automated review. But, as my conversation with support showed, even after getting internal track approval, you'll need to wait another three days when you want to go live for production approval. ("It should be slightly quicker, but again we recommend three days just to be safe")
- iainmerrick 7y ago
  There’s still a review process for the “internal” track even for an established app, and sometimes it gets held up. I think “internal” is a misnomer, it doesn’t seem to be handled any differently from a closed alpha channel.
jiveturkey 7y ago
how can they know? any app published on play store should have to be reviewed. if you just want internal testing, not open to the web, sideload it.

colechristensen 7y ago

Your post would benefit from focusing on the two real problems here * Lack of timed publishing feature * Lack of messaging about review until after submission The message isn't clear and people seem to be reacting to the three day process (not the problem) instead of the messaging and features around it.

cannam 7y ago
I thought the post was pretty clear on both of these things. I'm surprised that all the top-level comments here (at the time I write) are addressing only the longer review time - it seems clear enough that the real problem is that it's impossible to schedule a release properly.
- gray_-_wolf 7y ago
  It's clear after reading the article, but imho the news title gives different impression.
- Deimorz 7y ago
  So many people comment--on everything, not this post specifically--without reading anything more than the title of the HN post. They basically treat the title as a "topic suggestion" instead of reading the article itself. It's a pretty annoying behavior because it means that discussions often end up wildly off-topic or with a lot of comments missing the point, or just re-stating the exact same things that the article already said (often because people ask questions that the article answered, but they didn't read it). Unfortunately there's not really any good way to fix it. We had a big discussion about this same issue on Tildes recently too: https://tild.es/gjb https://tild.es/gjb
  - gtirloni 7y ago
    How about using a title that points to the real problem? "Google needs scheduled new app releases". Seems like a pretty good way to "fix" this, but I guess it wouldn't drive much traffic.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

jayd16 7y ago

Expecting to flip a switch for an app rollout is an anti-pattern. There's going to be a pretty slow propagation no matter what the policy is.

harrisonjackson 7y ago
Very true. Even Apple's manual release can take 24 hours to be searchable in the app store. They do make this clear during the release process.
zwily 7y ago
But at least you can have a “not before” policy, which is something you can work with in your marketing plan.