fix(otel): broaden R8 dontwarn for Auto Value (SDK-4207)

[abdulraqeeb33]

Summary

Addresses R8 release failures where opentelemetry-sdk-logs references Google Auto Value annotation types that are not on the app classpath (SDK-4207, GitHub #2596).

Changes

• OneSignalSDK/onesignal/otel/consumer-rules.pro: Replace three specific -dontwarn lines with -dontwarn com.google.auto.value.** so inner types and extensions (e.g. Memoized) are covered without follow-up tickets.
• examples/demo/app/proguard-rules.pro: Remove duplicate suppressions so minified demo builds exercise the library consumer-rules.pro (via OneSignalSDK/settings.gradle dependency substitution).

Verification

• ./gradlew :app:minifyGmsReleaseWithR8 :app:minifyHuaweiReleaseWithR8 from OneSignalSDK/ (PASS).

Made with Cursor

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR fixes R8 release minification failures caused by optional OpenTelemetry sdk-logs references to Google AutoValue annotation types that are not present on consuming apps’ classpaths, by shipping broader suppressions via the com.onesignal:otel consumer ProGuard rules and removing redundant demo-app-only suppressions.

Changes:

• Broaden AutoValue suppression in onesignal/otel consumer rules to -dontwarn com.google.auto.value.** to cover inner/extension types.
• Remove duplicate -dontwarn entries from the demo app so minified demo builds exercise the library-provided consumer rules.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
OneSignalSDK/onesignal/otel/consumer-rules.pro	Expands AutoValue -dontwarn to a wildcard to prevent R8 missing-class failures for optional annotation references.
examples/demo/app/proguard-rules.pro	Removes redundant suppressions so the demo relies on com.onesignal:otel consumer ProGuard rules during minified builds.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[claude]

🟡 The new comment in examples/demo/app/proguard-rules.pro incorrectly states that the demo relies on com.onesignal:otel's consumer-rules.pro, when in fact otel is not a transitive dependency of the demo app at all. Future contributors may believe the demo exercises otel's ProGuard consumer rules as a regression test, when it does not; this false assumption could cause real R8 failures to go undetected.

Extended reasoning...

What the bug is: The comment added at lines 23-24 of examples/demo/app/proguard-rules.pro reads: "Optional Jackson / Auto Value suppressions for OneSignal OTel are shipped in com.onesignal:otel consumer-rules.pro; the minified demo relies on those." This claim is factually incorrect.

The code path that triggers the misunderstanding: The PR description explains that "minified demo builds exercise the library consumer-rules.pro (via OneSignalSDK/settings.gradle dependency substitution)." While dependency substitution in settings.gradle does replace com.onesignal:otel with the local :OneSignal:otel project, this substitution only applies to modules that are already requested in the dependency graph — it cannot inject otel into a build that never declared it.

Why existing code doesn't prevent it:

• examples/demo/app/build.gradle.kts declares only com.onesignal:OneSignal as a dependency.
• OneSignalSDK/onesignal/build.gradle (the main SDK module) exposes core, notifications, in-app-messages, and location as api dependencies — NOT otel.
• Since otel is never in the demo's transitive dependency graph, Android Gradle Plugin never picks up otel's consumerProguardFiles (i.e., consumer-rules.pro) during the demo's R8 pass.

Why the demo build passes: The old dontwarn lines in proguard-rules.pro were dead code — otel classes were never on the demo's classpath, so R8 never generated warnings for them. Removing those lines is correct, but for the wrong stated reason.

Impact: The misleading comment creates a false impression that the demo's minified build acts as a regression test for otel's ProGuard consumer rules. If a future contributor adds otel as a dependency and otel's consumer-rules.pro is missing or broken, they may wrongly assume the demo would have caught it. Conversely, someone auditing the demo's ProGuard setup may waste time tracing a dependency path that doesn't exist.

Step-by-step proof:

1. Open examples/demo/app/build.gradle.kts — only com.onesignal:OneSignal is listed.
2. Open OneSignalSDK/onesignal/build.gradle — api deps are core, notifications, in-app-messages, location. No otel.
3. Run ./gradlew :app:dependencies in the demo — otel does not appear in the dependency tree.
4. Because otel is absent, AGP never merges otel's consumerProguardFiles into the demo's R8 config.
5. Conclusion: the comment's claim that "the minified demo relies on those" rules is incorrect.

How to fix it: Replace the comment with an accurate statement, e.g.: "The old dontwarn lines above were removed because otel classes are not on the demo classpath (otel is not a transitive dep of com.onesignal:OneSignal). If otel is ever added to the demo, consumer-rules.pro in com.onesignal:otel will supply the suppressions automatically."

[abdulraqeeb33]

@claude[agent] review

[Claude]

@claude[agent] review

Reviewed the PR. The changes look good:

b34c4db: Broadened -dontwarn to com.google.auto.value.** (covers all Auto Value types including inner classes/extensions) and removed demo app duplicates to exercise library consumer rules.

df3e76c: Enhanced documentation explaining that AGP merges otel's consumer-rules.pro when core pulls it as an implementation dependency.

The wildcard approach is maintainable and correctly addresses SDK-4207. CodeQL and lint checks passed.