There are a couple of bugs involved in the latest release of Google Maps, both issues (#510 and#526) were caused by the version3.32 which isexperimental.Quoting Google:

The experimental version — currently 3.32 — contains the latest features and bug fixes as they are made publicly available. Changes made to the experimental version are not guaranteed to be feature stable. We encourage you to regularly test your applications with the experimental version, which you can do by adding v=3.32 when loading the API

We would like our default version to be the latestrelease version, and not the latestexperimental version. To do so we set upv=3 if no version is specified by the user. Which will be, today 3/10/2018,3.31:

The current release version is 3.31. You can request it with either of the following bootstraps:

<script async defer    src="https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/js?v=3        &key=YOUR_API_KEY&callback=initMap">

<script async defer    src="https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/js?v=3.31        &key=YOUR_API_KEY&callback=initMap">

I am going to use3.31 to make sure that this library works, when3.32 is released, we would need to check if the issues that are affecting us now, will still be affecting us then. But for now, I think this is a good solution, this is also recommended by Google:

In order to make sure that there are no issues arising from version rollover, we recommend that you explicitly specify the number of the current release version of the API in the bootstrap. For example, v=3.31.

Source:https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/versions

itsmichaeldiego added4 commits

March 10, 2018 10:55

Move URL logic to a better place

f9f32f1

DRY

9f4711e

Set release version as default version

8207669

Actually, lets be careful and set v to 3.31

7dfe4a2

This was referencedMar 10, 2018

Markers are not clickable on mobile#526

Closed

Zooming is animating markers from the corners#510

Closed

itsmichaeldiego self-assigned this

Mar 10, 2018

itsmichaeldiego merged commit0413648 intomaster

Mar 10, 2018

itsmichaeldiego deleted the 510-526-set-release-version-default branch

March 10, 2018 21:57

This was referencedMar 12, 2018

Markers jump to the top left/bottom right corner on map zoom in/zoom out#536

Closed

Marker position not correct after wrapper width changed#528

Closed

Copy link

domesticmouse commentedMar 14, 2018

As a Googler on the Google Maps Developer Relations team, I can categorically state that this isn't a solution, just a delaying tactic. The advice given by our Google Maps JavaScript API team lead@stephenfarrar in#490 is coming from a place of knowledge. He looks after the API, after all.

I strongly suggest that you investigate fixing this properly by following his advice, and building on the prototype he provided in#510 (comment)

Copy link

Contributor

stephenfarrar commentedMar 14, 2018

FYI#526 is now fixed in v=3.32

Copy link

MemberAuthor

itsmichaeldiego commentedMar 14, 2018•
edited
Loading

@domesticmouse Thanks for your message, as a Collaborator on the Open Source Team, I try to unblock current or new users providing a simple solution from our side so they don't have to do extra research to be the problem. This was totally temporary and I never mentioned that this was the final solution, as I stated:

when 3.32 is released, we would need to check if the issues that are affecting us now, will still be affecting us then. But for now, I think this is a good solution, this is alsorecommended by Google

Right now as per@stephenfarrar'scomment. This is fixed and, we do not need to change our code. So, I believe this was a good call.

Thanks both of you@stephenfarrar and@domesticmouse

Copy link

Contributor

stephenfarrar commentedMar 14, 2018

@itsmichaeldiego Thanks for clarifying. Requesting 3.31 is exactly what we hope people will do if they encounter bugs in the Maps API like#526.

On the other hand,#490 and its duplicate#510 are not bugs in the Maps API. Rather, I think this library is doing something we don't support (all sorts of assumptions about how animations used to be implemented). I'm hoping that we could work together to remove these assumptions and make the library work even better.

I wasn't sure whether anyone was intending to keep on working at#510, given that the issue was closed. Should we open a new issue?