Also, I have only experience of updating from 1.3.13 → 1.4.19 (20).
If your project was previously updated with WFS version older than 1.3.13 there may be some problematic (leftover) code too.
Edit: For example, opening WFS 1.2.7 file with WFS 1.4.20
The watchface is created using the latest available WFS, i created it during last week. Regarding the effective size of the app on the watch, you can check it from settings > applications > app info > find your watchface > app info > storage space. Names could slightly differ, since my watch is set to a different language.
Aside from my watchfaces, the problem here (and it’s not the first time) is the lack of assistance and details from Google though.
I always thought the watchface files were compressed packages where the compression ratio can be 1:1 or more depending on stored data, so the file size it self may deceive about memory usage. But what is 10MB in compare with the 1500MB of RAM present even on the oldest Galaxy Watches…
Day 5: I stripped my watchface to the bare minimum. No customization, no tap actions, no color options. 3.5MB file. If it gets rejected again then it’s obvious that Google has some serious problems with this memory budget thing. I’m currently at 15 rejections in a row.
I’m talking about wfs project update continuity.
When 1.4.19 (1.4.20) got released, did you opened project made with 1.3.13 or older 1.2.7?
That’s why I advised to create completely new wfs project of same package name and publish new one. If you’re receiving multiple rejections because of the same thing even when removing huge part of the watch face code then there is huge probability of corrupted .wfs project file.
Tomas
No, it’s completely new, created in WFS 1.4.19 and built (the latest versions i uploaded) using V1.4.20
By the way, 16 rejections! They rejected the minimal and mostly empty version.
No problem, challenge accepted: I’ll literally empty the watchface and upload a black screen with the time on it.
At the time of Tizen and Galaxy Store, Samsung sent a clear explanation with video and image attachments in case of refusal. It was always easy to figure out how to fix issues. With Google we have to decipher what they write and go by trial and error.
The problem is: I’m out of ideas. I published an aab containing only the date, 5 optimized pngs and an analog clock and they still rejected it, even after the appeal, while ignoring my emails and continuous resubmissions. I’m literally wasting A LOT of time on this issue, not considering the earnings I could have done with the watchface.
Dear All, I just published another watch face today and got approval just by 2 hours after submissions. But still have not found any clue why my first one is rejected due to exceeds memory usage.
Dear @rzrshrpstudio , i would be happy if i can help you in this regards. Thanks.
Are you frustrated as much as I am?
Take action until 31. Aug - Reason: Tap action not working properly
This one I figured out - OK button in customization overlapping complication slot.
Take action until 31 Aug - Reason: * your application does not provide hour hand customizable to change styles as shown/described on the store listing.
I have 6 watch hand styles but they can be also color themed - tester most probably want watch hand styles with colors…
This one is really funny: * Your illustrated artwork does not occupy the entire icon.
What? 
This sentence does not even make any sense.
Worse thing is that I’ve uploaded new versions and also changed icons / description a bit but these watch faces are waiting for approval for 7 days as of now while some other updates (not rejected) are approved in few hours if not minutes)
Always something, aaalways… like 75% of time I’m spending is by solving some Play Store issues.
exactly, 75% of time spend to play console for their various requirement to upload a watch face.
So this memory exceeded error is not a common issue? Did you successfully published a watchface built using WFS 1.4.20 as a new app? And if yes, what’s the size of the AAB file? What does it contain? What’s the size once installed on the watch?
yap, i have published 5 watch faces already under WFS 1.4.20 as new app. All the AAB file sizes under 5MB. I have sent a link today and 4 watch face screen shot earlier, so you can find all those contains in respective watch face.
What’s the size of those watchfaces on the watch once installed? The aab of my watchface is now 3MB, 7MB once installed. That’s clearly an error, but talking to a human being inside Google seems to be impossible. Samsung and Apple’s support are completely on another level.
(I’m not astonished by the way. Months ago, one of my apps was rejected and I got an email with a screenshot attached. The screenshot was from a totally different app, of another developer)
Those are exemplars meant to demonstrate the issue, I’ve heard of others getting them. Samsung Seller Portal at least takes a video of the issue and includes it.
Ron
Samsung Developer Relations
I would suggest not cutting down existing face, but making new simple face from scratch to test the size.
This could make sense, if only the actual issue made sense. They were complaining about “missing login credentials to access your app” and the app was literally a watchface. They’re an absolute joke. I work on apps both for work and on my own since 2014 and i could write a book on how low quality Google assistance is, sadly.
Anyway, I’m about to publish another (new, with another package name) test watchface with literally nothing except the time inside, let’s see. If it gets accepted, and probably it will, I’ll be even more confused. And i still can’t get over the fact that a billion dollar company has a chat support for developers in a single language and always busy.
I updated a project from 1.3.13 with 1.4.20 and received no rejection.
Hi all, I never understood are they talking about RAM memory or storage memory? Anybody have answer for this?
I Wish I had. It’s probably the storage, or the aab file size. In both cases, my watchface should be perfectly compliant.