Today the ODK-X tool suite allow us to setup different applications on the same android device. As the docs explains:
This is handled in such a way that each user application is isolated from all other user applications, with separate configurations, data tables, and server settings. This allows one device to run multiple user applications built on top of the ODK-X tools without any coordination among the teams developing those applications.
However, we do not have this flexibility when hosting apps on the Sync Endpoint Server. That server is able to host only one application per time, hence the purpose for letting the device run multiple apps is kindoff sabotaged. Once it is hard to think that for each new app or development we’ll must get each device used to collect the responses and transfer the files through USB connection to get new versions and forms.
Moreover, simple user access configs that are invisible because the fact they are in different apps become an advanced row-level filters for managing different forms with different contexts in the same app. Once this is the way out of having many forms when there is only one app on the host. In a production-ready environment, creating different Sync Endpoint Servers on the same virtual instance or a new server instance (EC2 eg) is complicated and not scalable solution.
I think adds this feature will bring consistency to the tools suite. It’s like having a Ferrari but not be able to speed up in a highway.
I think exactly the same @ghteotonio !!
Moreover, it’s a question of efficiency and computational ressources, that can be optimized by adressing this feature.
@aortegon I moved your post out of the “Internship Project: Improve the ODK-X Suitcase Application” because you are discussing Sync-Endpoint in a Suitcase thread which will likely confuse the possible interns. This thread is where you should be discussing this improvement
@aortegon, a clarification it has not been two years it’s been less than two months, as on Jan 18th this thread was created. Additionally, if you examine the votes on implementing this feature, I personally voted that this feature should be advanced. The feature has been discussed at the ODK-X Community Meeting. I created an issue for this upgrade on Feb 1st:
It is waiting on being moved to “In Progress” until somebody has the resources to do the work. This is an open source project dependent on volunteers to make improvements.
At this point the lack of developer time to implement this is the limiting factor.
No updates on this. With the desire from the community has been noted. It is on the roadmap and will hopefully get cycles soon from the volunteer developers.
