Johnnyloans
The developer knew that a portion of users had a set-up in the app that deviated from what's intended. The main reason for the update is to address this.
Yes
An app allowing a user to submit incorrect data or skip required sections is the app's fault--not the user's.
No, it's the users fault.
The sections in question:
-> https://anonpic.net/0/OhewQ4CJmi.png
-> https://anonpic.net/0/lvOn1oufod.png
I've never heard of TypeError: Cannot read properties of null being a skill issue.
I have no idea what you are referring to.
2)
It is unclear if the update to remedy this was addressing all 3 issues:
Required sections are skippable
The affected sections have been completely removed, now requiring users to have a passphrase to unlock the app.
Aegis had the exact same issue when adding biometrics which is why they have so many warnings, they still have issues to this day and you can verify this by just looking at their Google Play Store review page.
Notable examples:
-> https://anonpic.net/0/4nBCVR8m4m.png
-> https://anonpic.net/0/7YydvCzkE3.png
Settings/data are different from expected
Migrating users who have bad configs/databases to a good config/database.
I don't know what you mean by this. You can download 1.0.0 and update to the 1.1.0 to verify how migration happens.
The issue is known but it seems you never tested the migration of these small number of users. If so, why only test a good environment when the issue is bad environments.
It was tested and worked as expected. Verified by 20 testers as can be seen in the Codeberg page.
It is commendable the 2 users here were so polite. Which makes the following even more tragic.
The questions of these users have already been answered in the Codeberg page.
3)
I fail to discern any accountability or responsibility -- let alone concern -- from the developer.
If an app's purpose is to hold secrets and the developer relieves themselves of all responsibility, why should any user store secrets in the app?
See the context provided in section 1. The only people who are complaining are the ones that had biometrics enabled and automatic backups disabled, no one else.
This comes off as an acceptable and necessary loss when I'm sure it was preventable with more planning.
I discovered that people were skipping screens when it first became available on the Google Play Store, thanks to their analytics and irl testing with friends, an update had to be made as I overestimated the user base.
Currently the app is gaining 2.87 new users daily on the Google Play Store and I have no way of knowing how many of them use automatic backups. Not to mention that the average user doesn't update their app manually and rather it's done by the Appstore automatically within the first month, though I had a case where a user didn't update the app for 4 months and had to modify an older version in order to save his accounts.
You could say that the migration could of been done better but this was a matter of time and the necessary steps were taken.