fix: Missing Proguard rules for R8 in full mode

[azlekov]

New Pull Request Checklist

• I am not disclosing a vulnerability.
• I am creating this PR in reference to an issue.

Issue Description

Closes: #1194

Approach

TODOs before merging

• Add tests
• Add changes to documentation (guides, repository pages, in-code descriptions)

[parse-github-assistant]

I will reformat the title to use the proper commit message syntax.

[parse-github-assistant]

Thanks for opening this pull request!

• 🎉 We are excited about your hands-on contribution!

[mtrezza]

Looks good

Is this ready for merge? I've changed this to a feat PR, since it seems to add support for Gradle 8 to the Parse SDK.

[azlekov]

Looks good

Is this ready for merge? I've changed this to a feat PR, since it seems to add support for Gradle 8 to the Parse SDK.

That's not quite correct. But fixes some release issues with ProGuard and R8

[mtrezza]

I assumed so because the issues don't seem to have these occurred so far. Is this an adaptation for Gradle 8 or is this also a bug for Gradle <8?

[mtrezza]

Maybe we should start adding a gradle matrix to the CI where we test with different gradle versions - would that make sense?

[azlekov]

Hey @mtrezza the issues which the developers are reporting are runtime. Because of wrong ProGuard rules after magnification is done Parse classes are erased and when you run the app it crashes. I need to think about if there can be some tests covering the cases by building and running simple app using parse via some instrumentation test and check whatever it crash or not.

[mtrezza]

Ok, so the minification is the core issue here. If we can't find a test (soon) we can also just merge this fix for now and open a new issue to add a test, so we don't forget it.

Other than that, wouod it still male sense to run the CI with multiple Gradle or Android versions? If so, I'll open a separate issue for that.

[mtrezza]

@azlekov This PR got somewhat stale, can we merge this or is there anything that is worth discussing beforehand?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (f9843c5) 0.00% compared to head (40a3fdf) 0.00%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #1196   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage    0.00%   0.00%           
======================================
  Files         122     122           
  Lines        9971    9971           
  Branches     1345    1345           
======================================
  Misses       9971    9971           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[parse-github-assistant]

I will reformat the title to use the proper commit message syntax.

[azlekov]

@mtrezza I change the title to be more precise, it's not a feat, but a fix for proguard R8 in full mode as mentioned in the #1194

[mtrezza]

Great! I've just slightly edited the title as it should describe the actual issue. Otherwise I think this is ready for merge?

[azlekov]

Great! I've just slightly edited the title as it should describe the actual issue. Otherwise I think this is ready for merge?

Yes, go go go! 🚗

[parseplatformorg]

🎉 This change has been released in version 4.2.1