As general background, OWNERS files expedite code reviews by helping
code authors quickly find relevant reviewers, and they also ensure
that stakeholders are involved in code changes in their areas.
Some teams under frameworks/base/ have been using OWNERS files
successfully for many years, and we're ready to expand them to cover
more areas. Here's the historical coverage statistics for the last
two years of changes before these new OWNERS changes land:
-- 56% of changes are fully covered by OWNERS
-- 17% of changes are partially covered by OWNERS
-- 25% of changes have no OWNERS coverage
Working closely with team leads, we've now identified clear OWNERS on
a per-package basis, and we're using "include" directives whenever
possible to to simplify future maintenance. With this extensive
effort, we've now improved our coverage as follows:
-- 98% of changes are fully covered by OWNERS
-- 1% of changes are partially covered by OWNERS
-- 1% of changes have no OWNERS coverage
This specific change is automatically generated by a script from
detailed ownership information confirmed by team leads.
Bug: 174932174
Test: manual
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: refactoring with team leads buy-in
Merged-In: I9789c97c1de8e5d962b48c29c57d82fe83729eba
Change-Id: I9789c97c1de8e5d962b48c29c57d82fe83729eba
Use the AutoValue built from source instead of the prebuilts
from external/dagger2.
Bug: 158870037
Test: m checkbuild
Change-Id: Ibadc0845cbb41f1dd312f38ac45d91e56cbe9a62
Apps making calls into the system server may end up persisting
internal state or making security decisions based on the perceived
success or failure of a call, or any default values returned. For
this reason, we want to strongly throw when there was trouble with
the transaction.
The rethrowFromSystemServer() method is the best-practice way of
doing this correctly, so that we don't clutter logs with misleading
stack traces, and this checker verifies that best-practice is used.
Disable this check on managers that we know are hosted outside the
system process.
Bug: 155703208
Test: ./build/soong/soong_ui.bash --make-mode framework-minus-apex services RUN_ERROR_PRONE=true
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: trivial annotations
Change-Id: I04b4daf7c92251a14bcc3ebb1e18cd00f6a7f283
Over the years we've had several obscure bugs related to how SDK level
comparisons are performed, specifically during the window of time
where we've started distributing the "frankenbuild" to developers.
Consider the case where a framework developer shipping release "R"
wants to only grant a specific behavior to modern apps; they could
write this in two different ways:
1. if (targetSdkVersion > Build.VERSION_CODES.Q) {
2. if (targetSdkVersion >= Build.VERSION_CODES.R) {
The safer of these two options is (2), which will ensure that
developers only get the behavior when *both* the app and the
platform concur on the specific SDK level having shipped.
Consider the breakage that would happen with option (1) if we
started shipping APKs that are based on the final R SDK, but are
then installed on earlier preview releases which still consider R
to be CUR_DEVELOPMENT; they'd risk crashing due to behaviors that
were never part of the official R SDK.
Bug: 64412239
Test: ./build/soong/soong_ui.bash --make-mode services RUN_ERROR_PRONE=true
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: trivial blueprint changes
Change-Id: Ia20181f8602451ac9a719ea488d148e160708592
