I'm sending push notifications to a notification extension, and within the extension setting the threadIdentifier to be the same. But I'm observing inconsistent grouping behaviour, and behaviour that changes over time. The general iPhone settings are to display notifications as a Stack, and the app settings are to show on lock screen, notification center and banners and the notification grouping is set to by app (changing it to automatic doesn't affect the behaviour below). Pushes are displayed on the lock screen grouped together, then if the device is roused and the screen swiped down to reveal the notification center then they are still grouped. So far so good. If the iphone is active then the notifications appear at the top of the screen, one by one, but in this case if there is a swipe down to reveal the notification center then the notifications are not grouped when displayed, but shown individually. But then if one waits a few minutes and then displays the notification center for a 2nd time, sometimes now they will be grouped, but sometimes not. Why are they not (always) being displayed as grouped in the notification center?

I've used SPM to install some dependencies, however for one of them, CocoaLumberjackSwift the Embed section is blank and attempting to click in it doesn't brink up any dropdown menuetc. Why is that, how can I change it or check what its set to if its blank? (Code 16.2)

I'm creating a .xcframework in order to deliver an api/functionality to a customer for inclusion into an app. I'm doing it as a .xcframework as I want it to be a binary so that the source code isn't accessable. The xcframework has dependencies on modules which are installed via SPM (there are a few, an example is PhoneNumberKit) When I build the xcframework and then add it to a test program and invoke its api then there's a run time error saying "PhoneNumberKit/resource_bundle_accessor.swift:44: Fatal error: unable to find bundle named PhoneNumberKit_PhoneNumberKit" How can I build the xcframework so that its dependencies are included within it? (Stepping back a bit, is an xcframework an appropriate approach for this?)

I'm getting confused reading conflicting information about Swift Packages (for example, many sources say its for distributing source code only, but Apple's documentation says a binary framework can be included in them). What I would like to be able to do is to distribute a project as a binary to external customers (so they cannot see the source code) but distribute it as source code for internal consumption (so when developing a test app that uses the project, source code can be stepped through in the debugger etc.) Is the feasible/easy? Could a package manifest be created that can easily be flipped between creating a package containing source only, and a binary only. Or would it be better to have two separate manifests?

In the documentation for the Contact Provider Extension contact provider it says Use the Contact Provider framework if your app manages its own contacts and wants to make them available in other apps that use the Contacts framework. But how does an app manage its own contacts? What needs to be done differently if it manages its own contacts versus managing a user's contacts? Does the user still need to grant contacts access for example? Is there a special group/domain that should be used (how) to add app contacts? There's no mention of any of this that I can see in the documentation for CNContact or CNContactStore.

Hello I have a few questions regarding the Live Caller ID lookup feature First question: The documentation for Live Caller ID Lookup says that "the system does not use private relay when the application is installed directly from XCode.This allows the application & the service deployment to be tested before filling out the onboarding form and setting up private relay." What is the situation regarding development distribution signed .ipas? Would they be able to bypass the private relay too? Second question: Is there anyway an application could dynamically switch which blocking dataset gets used? The use case for this is providing the option to the user whether a set of numbers gets blocked or not. If the OS makes a blocking lookup and an identity lookup, then if these always map to the same blocking dataset then it means the blocking behaviour is the same for every user there is. That means whatever decisions the server makes as to what numbers to block applies to every user. Whether to block a number of not is a fuzzy decision, it would be good if users had the ability to decide for themselves if fuzzy numbers should be blocked or not rather than have that imposed upon them. Third question: It looks from the way things are set up that 2) is not actually possible. If that is the case then will it be permitted for two endpoints to be registered with Apple? (then the app could implement more than one Live Caller ID extension which provide different blocking behaviour)? Thank you very much.

I have a requirement to launch an app from another app (there is no requirement to launch the app from a website), and if its not installed then for the user to be redirected to the app store to download the app. The app already has a custom url scheme implemented, however the documentation and tutorials in this area are confusing and unclear. In order to launch the app, the custom url scheme will provide that, however, in order to get the redirection to the app store then firstly does the custom url scheme have to be replaced with universal links? Secondly, is it necessary to have a webpage that links to the app store? Is it possible to get this behaviour without having a website? Is it the case that Apple doesn't provide this functionality and developers have to have the hassle of hosting a website purely just for the sake of redirecting to the App Store?

I would like to add both a Notification Service Extension and a Notification Content Extension to my application. After reading some documentation and tutorials etc. I'm not clear if the Communication Notifications capability is needed or not. If it is, should it get added to the App ID or the notification IDs, or both?

When I run my app on iOS 18, the following gets logged to the XCode console. error: Error reading commands from file lldbinit - file not found. I've never heard of that file before. What is it, why is it needed, why does the app (unbeknown to me) try to read from it, and why is it missing?

I've got an existing app using storyboards and would like to incorporate the new iOS 18 ContactAccessButton() and contactAccessPicker() into the GUI. However, how can that be done? If I try to do something like add a UIView to a view controller in the storyboard, then ContactAccessButton can't be assigned to it (even though ContactAccessButton inherits from UIView). Nor can a ContactAccessButton be used as a type within the Storyboard/the View Controller. How do I go about integrating this new iOS feature into an existing app using Storyboards and view controllers?

If I have an XCode project that generates a framework when built, then I've noticed that its possible to add new additional targets to the project of type app extension. However if I add some source code to an app extension and regenerate the framework, then that source code is not accessable from the resulting framework (i.e. if the framework is included into an app, then the app code doesn't have visibility of the code that was added to the extension in the framework). Is this something which is possible to achieve? Ideally I would like to package the main source code that constitutes the framework content, along with the source code for a few extensions into a single framework, so that the app(s) that use the framework can include the framework into their main app target and also include it in the app extension target. I noticed that if the scheme of the framework is changed to the extension before building, then the result is not a .framework file but a .appex file. For client apps of the framework, can they directly include/use that .appex file? If so how can that be achieved? Does

Hello, if an associated domain is specified for an app (for example, the url of a server services an app extension text spam filtering) then what is there in place to stop somebody with malicious intentions from obtaining that url from the .plist/.entitlements file of the app and doing something with that url, such as denial of service attack or whatever?

When uploading to Testflight the following questions get posted. How to answer this question gets asked in many forums, however none of the answers are satisfactory and it seems every body misreads option two. What type of encryption algorithms does your app implement? Encryption algorithms that are proprietary or not accepted as standard by international standard bodies (IEEE, IETF, ITU, etc.) Standard encryption algorithms instead of, or in addition to, using or accessing the encryption within Apple's operating system Both algorithms mentioned above None of the algorithms mentioned above In the case where an application is using standard encryption provided by the OS itself and isn't doing anything proprietary, what should the answer be? Many people on the internet say the answer should be 2). 2) Does mention standard encryption algorithms, but everybody seems to gloss over this phrase "instead of, or in addition to, using or accessing the encryption within Apple's operating system" Two is not saying the app uses standard encryption algorithms from the OS, two is saying using standard encryption algorithms instead of or in addition to, those provided by the OS. In the above options, there is none to select for the situation where the app only uses standard algorithms from the OS. If that is what 2 is meant to be, then the grammar and English usage doesn't not actually mean that. The phrase "instead of or in addition to" changes that. So what option to choose? Is there a bug in 2 and its English grammar is incorrect and doesn't convey the actual intended meaning?

The documentation (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/BundleResources/Entitlements/com.apple.developer.associated-domains) for a message filter extension says: If you use a private web server, which is unreachable from the public internet, while developing your app, enable the alternate mode feature to bypass the CDN and connect directly to your server. <service>:<fully qualified domain>?mode=<alternate mode> Where alternate mode is one of the following: developer Specifies that only devices in developer mode can access the domain. In this mode, you can use any valid SSL certificate on your web server, including a certificate that the system doesn’t trust. What does it mean "you can use any valid SSL certificate on your web server"? Does the app have to do anything with regards to this?

I have a developer certificate but not a distribution certificate (its not my Apple account). Its possible to create an .xcarchive with a developer certificate, but what about a .ipa? After creating an archive, non of the distribution options within XCode will work without a dist cert. Is there another way to make an .ipa with just a dev cert? And if so is that going to be a dev build rather than a prod build (i.e. the .ipa would only install onto provisioned devices and would be no good for uploading to testflight for example)