[MS-1284] Refactor config store models to use Kotlin Serialization by meladRaouf · Pull Request #1529 · Simprints/Android-Simprints-ID

meladRaouf · 2026-01-13T09:31:07Z

JIRA ticket
Will be released in: 2026.1.0

Notable changes

Removed AnyPrimitiveSerializer as it did not behave as expected.
Replaced intent event extras Any with String.
Adopted Kotlin serialization in the infra/config-store module.

Testing guidance

Log in to SID, modify configuration settings—especially the custom configurations in Vulcane—and verify that SID behaves as expected.

Additional work checklist

Effect on other features and security has been considered
Design document marked as "In development" (if applicable)
External (Gitbook) and internal (Confluence) Documentation is up to date (or ticket created)
Test cases in Testiny are up to date (or ticket created)
Other teams notified about the changes (if applicable)

Copilot

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

meladRaouf · 2026-01-13T09:32:29Z

    fun addInvalidIntentEvent(
        action: String,
-        extras: Map<String, Any>,
+        extras: Map<String, String>,


I am still verifying this part, as I believe using String alone should be sufficient for the extras.

Tested and it is working as expected. below an example event

{ "id": "ebc63e69-3360-4071-a1d5-da10da55f719", "type": "InvalidIntent", "version": 2, "payload": { "startTime": { "unixMs": 1768329314909, "isUnixMsTrustworthy": true, "elapsedSinceBoot": 85249056 }, "action": "com.simprints.id.REGISTER", "extras": { "test": "newExtra", "projectId": "NDAdcsfcentNWOGsIkqC", "userId": "1", "oduleId": "1", "callerPackageName": "com.simprints.intentlauncher" } }, "tokenizedFields": [] }

I think that this might only be used in the dashboard reporting and values are only looked at in case of deep investigation, so just strings would be fine.

What happens if other types are passed?

Ah, you are explicitly converting it. Then I guess it's fine.

meladRaouf · 2026-01-13T09:42:01Z

 */
 data class ExperimentalProjectConfiguration(
-    private val customConfig: Map<String, Any>?,
+    private val customConfig: Map<String, JsonElement>?,


As per the design, JsonElement is sufficient here, since Vulcan only allows JSON content for custom configuration.

meladRaouf · 2026-01-13T09:47:18Z

-            projectConfiguration.copy(custom = null),
-        )
-
-        assertThat(


This is an invalid test case, as projectConfiguration.custom is now a Map<String, JsonElement>.

But the test is about handling a broken json string value in the protobuf store and has nothing to do with the type of experimental/custom config property.

The old test case was verifying whether values in custom: Map<String, Any> could be converted to a string to be stored as protopuf. Now that custom is Map<String, JsonElement>, this verification will always succeed. Every value can be converted

Copilot

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 35 out of 35 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Copilot

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 35 out of 35 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.

Copilot

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

sonarqubecloud · 2026-01-13T20:19:59Z

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
80.7% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

luhmirin-s · 2026-01-14T07:38:38Z

    fun addInvalidIntentEvent(
        action: String,
-        extras: Map<String, Any>,
+        extras: Map<String, String>,


I think that this might only be used in the dashboard reporting and values are only looked at in case of deep investigation, so just strings would be fine.

luhmirin-s · 2026-01-14T07:49:35Z


 @Keep
+@Serializable
+@ExcludedFromGeneratedTestCoverageReports("Data class")


Is there any chance that we could get rid of this migration all together?

Once all users migrate to SID 2022.4.0

luhmirin-s · 2026-01-14T08:00:31Z

-            projectConfiguration.copy(custom = null),
-        )
-
-        assertThat(


But the test is about handling a broken json string value in the protobuf store and has nothing to do with the type of experimental/custom config property.

BurningAXE · 2026-01-14T17:08:16Z

            )
        private val JSON_FACE_CONFIGURATION_WITH_UNEXPECTED_FIELD =
-            JsonHelper.fromJson<Map<String, String>>(
+            JsonHelper.fromJson<Map<String, JsonElement>>(


Should we change the type here?

Yes we had to change the type. Jackson is lenient by default. It silently coerces: numbers → strings and booleans → strings while kotlinx.serialization is strict by design. No implicit coercion. if you check the json string you will see that it contains numbers and booleans

meladRaouf requested a review from Copilot January 13, 2026 09:31

cla-bot Bot added the ... label Jan 13, 2026

Copilot AI reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

meladRaouf commented Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

meladRaouf force-pushed the ks-config-store branch from 19f1f5d to cbe32d1 Compare January 13, 2026 09:54

meladRaouf requested a review from Copilot January 13, 2026 09:55

Copilot AI reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

meladRaouf force-pushed the ks-config-store branch from cbe32d1 to 4c37d17 Compare January 13, 2026 10:14

meladRaouf requested a review from Copilot January 13, 2026 10:17

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of meladRaouf January 13, 2026 10:17 View session

meladRaouf marked this pull request as draft January 13, 2026 10:17

meladRaouf force-pushed the ks-config-store branch 4 times, most recently from 28ad523 to 9e98591 Compare January 13, 2026 12:02

meladRaouf requested review from Copilot and removed request for Copilot January 13, 2026 12:27

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of meladRaouf January 13, 2026 12:27 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .../simprints/face/capture/screens/livefeedback/LiveFeedbackAutoCaptureFragmentViewModelTest.kt Outdated

Comment thread .../simprints/face/capture/screens/livefeedback/LiveFeedbackAutoCaptureFragmentViewModelTest.kt Outdated

meladRaouf force-pushed the ks-config-store branch 2 times, most recently from fb0ae29 to be2bf86 Compare January 13, 2026 12:45

Copilot AI reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

meladRaouf requested a review from Copilot January 13, 2026 14:06

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of meladRaouf January 13, 2026 14:06 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

meladRaouf requested review from BurningAXE and luhmirin-s January 13, 2026 18:21

meladRaouf requested review from alex-vt and alexandr-simprints January 13, 2026 18:21

meladRaouf marked this pull request as ready for review January 13, 2026 18:22

meladRaouf force-pushed the ks-config-store branch 2 times, most recently from 22d129c to 4a74bca Compare January 13, 2026 20:06

luhmirin-s reviewed Jan 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

alexandr-simprints approved these changes Jan 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

[MS-1284] Refactor config store models to use Kotlin Serialization

879aa81

meladRaouf force-pushed the ks-config-store branch from 4a74bca to 879aa81 Compare January 14, 2026 13:45

luhmirin-s approved these changes Jan 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

BurningAXE reviewed Jan 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

BurningAXE approved these changes Jan 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

meladRaouf merged commit 0bdabfa into main Jan 14, 2026
12 checks passed

meladRaouf deleted the ks-config-store branch January 14, 2026 20:30

Conversation

meladRaouf commented Jan 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Notable changes

Testing guidance

Additional work checklist

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud Bot commented Jan 13, 2026

Quality Gate passed

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

meladRaouf commented Jan 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading