BoundService + LiveData + ViewModel best practice in new Android recommended architecture
Updated:
After getting suggestion from @Ibrahim Disouki (Thank you for that) I dig deeper and found out something interesting! Here's background.
O.P. seeks for solution "Where Service component of Android Framework stands considering Android Architecture Components". So, here's out the box(SDK) solution.
It stands at the same level as Activity/Fragment
. How? If you're extending Service class though rather than that, start extending LifecycleService. Reason behind that is simple that previously we had to rely on Activity/Fragment lifecycle in order to receive updates/do some contextual operations on Service. But now it's not the case.
LifecycleService
now has it's own lifecycle registry/maintainer called ServiceLifecycleDispatcher
which takes care of lifecycle of service which also makes it LifecycleOwner
.
It leaves us in condition that from now on, You can have a ViewModel
to LifecycleService
doing operations for itself & if you're following proper app architecture and having repository pattern leaves you to single source of truth!
In context of O.P. LifecycleService now can have ability to maintain it's ViewModel
to do business logic related to repository layer, and later on another lifecycle aware component like, Activity/Fragment can also consume/reuse same ViewModel
to have their specific operations to it.
Please note that by doing so, you're in state of having two different LifecycleOwner
s (Activity & LifecycleServie) which means you can't share view models between LifecycleService
& other lifecycle aware components. If you don't like approach then be good with old callback kind of approach having callbacks back to Activity/Fragment from service when data is ready to serve etc.
Obselete:
(I suggest not to read through)
In my opinion, Service should be on same level as Activity/Fragment, because it's Framework component & not MVVM. but because of that Service doesn't implements LifecycleOwner and it's Android Framework Component, it shouldn't be treated as data source because it can be entry point to application.
So, dilemma here is that sometimes (In your case), Service acts as data source which provides data from some long running task to UI.
So what it should be in Android Architecture Component? I think you can treat it as LifecycleObserver. because, no matter what you do in background, you'll need to consider about lifecycle of the LifecycleOwner.
Why? because, we usually do bind it to LifecycleOwner (Activity/Fragments) & to do long running tasks off the UI. So, it can be treated like LifecycleObserver. In such a way we made our Service as "Lifecycle aware component" !
How you can implement it?
Take your service class and implement LifecycleObserver interface to it.
When you bind your service to
Activity/Fragment
, during your service connection of your service class, add your service to your activity as LifecycleObserver by calling methodgetLifecycle().addObserver(service class obj)
Now, Take an interface in service class to provide callback from service to your UI and every time your data changes, check that if your service has at least on Lifecycle event create or resume to provide callback with.
In such a way, we won't require LiveData
to update to from service and even no ViewModel
(Why do we need it for service? We don't need configuration changes to survive on service lifecycle. And main task to VM is that to consist data between lifecycles).
Side Note: If you think you're having long running background operations, then consider using WorkManager
. After using this library, you'll feel like Services should be marked as deprecated by now! (Just a random thought)