feat: add object data support moengage #1909
Conversation
maheshkutty
requested review from
lvrach,
cisse21,
debanjan97,
am6010,
ssbeefeater,
ItsSudip,
sandeepdsvs,
krishna2020 and
1abhishekpandey
as code owners
WalkthroughThe changes update the MoEngage configuration files. In Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant UI
participant ConfigService
participant MoEngageService
User->>UI: Toggle "Send object data in events" checkbox
UI->>ConfigService: Check feature flag "AMP_use-moengage-object-data"
ConfigService-->>UI: Return flag status (true/false)
alt Feature flag enabled
UI->>MoEngageService: Enable useObjectData setting
else Feature flag disabled
UI-->>User: Inform feature unavailable
end
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #1909 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 2 2
Lines 53 53
Branches 7 7
=========================================
Hits 53 53 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
src/configurations/destinations/moengage/db-config.json(4 hunks)src/configurations/destinations/moengage/ui-config.json(2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Actions: Code quality checks
src/configurations/destinations/moengage/db-config.json
[error] 1-1: Command failed with exit code 1.
src/configurations/destinations/moengage/ui-config.json
[error] 1-1: Command failed with exit code 1.
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Analyze (java-kotlin)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
src/configurations/destinations/moengage/db-config.json (5)
16-17: New Key Addition in includeKeys Array
The new"useObjectData"key has been added to theincludeKeysarray to enable support for object data in MoEngage events. This aligns with the new UI configuration change. Please verify that any downstream processing or validations incorporate this new key appropriately.
107-108: Addition to Default Destination Configuration
The"useObjectData"key is now included in thedestConfig.defaultConfigarray. This ensures that the default configuration for sending object data is available and consistent with the UI configuration.
34-59: Enhanced Readability for supportedMessageTypes
The multi-line formatting applied to thesupportedMessageTypesobject (including both the"cloud"array and the nested arrays under"device") improves clarity without altering functionality.
61-98: Improved Formatting for supportedConnectionModes Array
The reformatting of thesupportedConnectionModesobject into a multi-line structure enhances readability and maintainability. No changes in functionality are expected.
182-184: Consistent Formatting for secretKeys Array
ThesecretKeysarray has been reformatted to align with the project’s style guidelines. This change increases consistency and readability throughout the JSON configuration.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
src/configurations/destinations/moengage/schema.json (3)
25-29: Event Filtering Option Specification
The neweventFilteringOptionproperty defines a clear choice between"disable","whitelistedEvents", and"blacklistedEvents"with a default of"disable".
Suggestion: Consider adding a descriptivedescriptionfield to explain the impact of each option for better schema self-documentation.
30-41: Whitelisted Events Structure
The schema forwhitelistedEventsenforces an array of objects with each object containing aneventNamefollowing the specified pattern.
Suggestion: If undesired extra keys in event objects should be prevented, consider adding"additionalProperties": falsewithin the item schema to enforce stricter object definitions.
42-53: Blacklisted Events Structure
TheblacklistedEventsproperty mirrors the structure ofwhitelistedEvents, ensuring consistency in validation for event names.
Suggestion: As with the whitelist, you might want to enforce"additionalProperties": falsewithin each object if that fits the design requirements.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/configurations/destinations/moengage/schema.json(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (7)
src/configurations/destinations/moengage/schema.json (7)
5-6: Enforce Strict Schema and Required Credentials
The addition of"additionalProperties": falseensures that the configuration remains strictly confined only to the defined properties. The explicit declaration of"required": ["apiId", "apiKey", "region"]guarantees that essential credentials are always provided.
8-11: Define API Key Format
TheapiKeyproperty is clearly defined with a string type and a regex pattern to accommodate templated values, environment variable references, or strings up to 100 characters. This provides consistent validation for API key values.
12-15: Define API ID Format
Similarly to theapiKey, theapiIdproperty uses a regex pattern to enforce a consistent format; this maintains symmetry between the two critical credentials.
16-20: Region Property with Enumerated Values
Theregionproperty is well-defined with an enum restricting values to"US","EU", or"IND", along with a default value of"US". This helps avoid misconfiguration by limiting acceptable region codes.
21-24: Add Object Data Support for Events
The newuseObjectDataproperty is correctly introduced as a boolean with a default offalse, directly supporting the PR’s objective of enabling object data in events for MoEngage.
54-70: Native SDK Support Configuration
TheuseNativeSDKproperty is defined as an object containing boolean flags for various platforms (android,ios,web,reactnative). This configuration allows for granular control over the SDK usage.
71-78: Debug Configuration for Web
The newdebugproperty is correctly structured as an object with awebboolean property. This enables toggling debug mode specifically for the web platform.
| @@ -51,6 +51,20 @@ | |||
| "value": "useNativeSDK", | |||
| "default": false | |||
| }, | |||
| { | |||
| "type": "checkbox", | |||
| "label": "Send object data in events", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to update this statement. Without this option, we will flatten the object and send it.
What are the changes introduced in this PR?
Added a new field for getting input to use object data in events fo moengage
What is the related Linear task?
Resolves INT-3279
Please explain the objectives of your changes below
Put down any required details on the broader aspect of your changes. If there are any dependent changes, mandatorily mention them here
Any changes to existing capabilities/behaviour, mention the reason & what are the changes ?
N/A
Any new dependencies introduced with this change?
N/A
Any new checks got introduced or modified in test suites. Please explain the changes.
N/A
Developer checklist
My code follows the style guidelines of this project
No breaking changes are being introduced.
All related docs linked with the PR?
All changes manually tested?
Any documentation changes needed with this change?
I have executed schemaGenerator tests and updated schema if needed
Are sensitive fields marked as secret in definition config?
My test cases and placeholders use only masked/sample values for sensitive fields
Is the PR limited to 10 file changes & one task?
Reviewer checklist
Is the type of change in the PR title appropriate as per the changes?
Verified that there are no credentials or confidential data exposed with the changes.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
"useObjectData"key.apiKey,apiId,region) to enhance configuration requirements.Bug Fixes