Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Unable to edit API for Standard license #5407

Open
1 of 2 tasks
yedubi opened this issue Feb 12, 2025 · 10 comments
Open
1 of 2 tasks

Unable to edit API for Standard license #5407

yedubi opened this issue Feb 12, 2025 · 10 comments
Labels
Bug status: confirmed Issue has been reproduced and confirmed as a bug.

Comments

@yedubi
Copy link

yedubi commented Feb 12, 2025

Can we access your project?

  • I give permission for members of the FlutterFlow team to access and test my project for the sole purpose of investigating this issue.

Current Behavior

I have 2 APIs
and when I update one of them then get alert that I should upgrade my plan
but according to conditions in Standard license I can have 2 APIs

Expected Behavior

Should be able to edit API defs

Steps to Reproduce

Create 2 API and try to edit

Reproducible from Blank

  • The steps to reproduce above start from a blank project.

Bug Report Code (Required)

not a bug in Widget Tree

Visual documentation

Environment

- FlutterFlow version: 
- Platform:
- Browser name and version:
- Operating system and version affected:

Additional Information

No response

@yedubi yedubi added the status: needs triage A potential issue that has not been confirmed as a bug. label Feb 12, 2025
@Alezanello Alezanello self-assigned this Feb 13, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

Hello!

Thanks for bringing this up—you’re absolutely right! I’ll pass this along to the engineering team for further review.

@Alezanello Alezanello removed the status: needs triage A potential issue that has not been confirmed as a bug. label Feb 13, 2025
@Alezanello Alezanello added status: confirmed Issue has been reproduced and confirmed as a bug. Bug labels Feb 13, 2025 — with Linear
@Alezanello Alezanello removed their assignment Feb 13, 2025
@m-rick1
Copy link

m-rick1 commented Feb 14, 2025

I second this !

@MickaMalko
Copy link

It's a very clever trick to push people into upgrading to the higher, and obviously more expensive, subscription ;) Out of 1,500 people who face this issue, how many will upgrade without even questioning it? Just think about it.

@yedubi
Copy link
Author

yedubi commented Feb 19, 2025

Hello!

Thanks for bringing this up—you’re absolutely right! I’ll pass this along to the engineering team for further review.

Hi, when it will be fixed?
It's very annoying bug during active development phase

@Teamworq
Copy link

This is taking to long. I have paid 30 dollar for the use of the package so please make it work. I need to work with my api calls

@AirtonLucianoAragao
Copy link

It seems that is not a hard bug to solve. In fact It was introduced because until last week everything was ok.

May you give priority ?

Thanks

@Teamworq
Copy link

Please solve this problem. I am paying 30 dollar a month and can not work without my api's.

@AirtonLucianoAragao
Copy link

AirtonLucianoAragao commented Feb 21, 2025 via email

@MickaMalko
Copy link

MickaMalko commented Feb 21, 2025

Maybe a workaround is allow a free upgrade to a plan without this
restriction.

Rgds

**But you're dreaming, buddy... There's NO WAY they're going to move anyone from the $30 plan to the $70 plan without applying an extra charge, even temporarily, just to bypass the issue. Quite the opposite. They're hoping that the $30 customers upgrade to $70 out of impatience or frustration :)

The only thing you can do is formally demand that Google implement a fix as soon as possible. And all affected users should file a class-action lawsuit.

FF is currently deceiving its users who are paying for the $30 plan.

Because the current bug really seems to be a form of fraud.**

@nathankrishnan
Copy link

nathankrishnan commented Feb 21, 2025

I would like to inform that we are preparing a fix for this bug. The fix is currently in review and afterwards we will deploy it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug status: confirmed Issue has been reproduced and confirmed as a bug.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants