-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 384
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove the use of intent provider for request vpn permission #6592
Conversation
44c019d
to
2c6bba6
Compare
5006f13
to
5a59129
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewed 7 of 7 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @Pururun)
android/app/src/main/kotlin/net/mullvad/mullvadvpn/ui/MainActivity.kt
line 101 at r1 (raw file):
} override fun onNewIntent(intent: Intent) {
Does removing this not impact how we use intents for tests? Might be good to rebase and ensure mockapi
tests are passing locally and in GH actions
android/app/src/main/kotlin/net/mullvad/mullvadvpn/viewmodel/ChangelogViewModel.kt
line 1 at r1 (raw file):
package net.mullvad.mullvadvpn.viewmodel
What's the reason for keeping this VM and not including the last remaining function into the AppVM?
android/app/src/main/kotlin/net/mullvad/mullvadvpn/viewmodel/MullvadAppViewModel.kt
line 1 at r1 (raw file):
package net.mullvad.mullvadvpn.viewmodel
I have a vague memory of us discussing having an AppVM and deciding against it, but I can't recall any details. Does that sound familiar and in that case have the circumstances changed? 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @albin-mullvad)
android/app/src/main/kotlin/net/mullvad/mullvadvpn/viewmodel/ChangelogViewModel.kt
line 1 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, albin-mullvad wrote…
What's the reason for keeping this VM and not including the last remaining function into the AppVM?
Previously this viewmodel was used by both MullvadApp
and ChangelogDialog
, now it is only used by the ChangelogDialog
. So it has no connection to MullvadApp
anymore.
android/app/src/main/kotlin/net/mullvad/mullvadvpn/viewmodel/MullvadAppViewModel.kt
line 1 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, albin-mullvad wrote…
I have a vague memory of us discussing having an AppVM and deciding against it, but I can't recall any details. Does that sound familiar and in that case have the circumstances changed? 🤔
I think that is true. And I have kept NoDaemonViewModel
for this reason. Just thought it was unnecessary to add a new view model to do connect
but maybe that is fine?
5a59129
to
a293fc5
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @albin-mullvad)
android/app/src/main/kotlin/net/mullvad/mullvadvpn/ui/MainActivity.kt
line 101 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, albin-mullvad wrote…
Does removing this not impact how we use intents for tests? Might be good to rebase and ensure
mockapi
tests are passing locally and in GH actions
Good suggestion! Seems to work fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @Pururun)
android/app/src/main/kotlin/net/mullvad/mullvadvpn/viewmodel/ChangelogViewModel.kt
line 1 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, Pururun (Jonatan Rhodin) wrote…
Previously this viewmodel was used by both
MullvadApp
andChangelogDialog
, now it is only used by theChangelogDialog
. So it has no connection toMullvadApp
anymore.
I'm a bit confused by the split since most changelog logic is part of the AppVM. I think it's easiest to continue this discussion outside of the PR review.
d3b22d0
to
a0cc830
Compare
a0cc830
to
af52714
Compare
af52714
to
bef3c80
Compare
Closing this since we will probably remove the changelog dialog in the future and that would have pretty big impact on this PR. |
This change is