feat(27254): implement new remote-feature-flag-controller #4931

DDDDDanica · 2024-11-14T17:02:27Z

Explanation

Following the ADR here

Adds a new controller, remote-feature-flag-controller that fetches the remote feature flags and provide cache solution for consumers.

References

Related to #27254

Changelog

`@metamask/remote-feature-flag-controller`

ADDED: Initial release

Checklist

I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate
I've highlighted breaking changes using the "BREAKING" category above as appropriate
I've prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve any breaking changes

socket-security · 2024-11-15T03:14:48Z

No dependency changes detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

👍 No dependency changes detected in pull request

DDDDDanica · 2024-11-20T12:33:44Z

@metamaskbot publish-preview

github-actions · 2024-11-20T12:37:22Z

Preview builds have been published. See these instructions for more information about preview builds.

Expand for full list of packages and versions.

{
  "@metamask-previews/accounts-controller": "19.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/address-book-controller": "6.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/announcement-controller": "7.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/approval-controller": "7.1.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/assets-controllers": "44.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/base-controller": "7.0.2-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/build-utils": "3.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/chain-controller": "0.1.3-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/composable-controller": "9.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/controller-utils": "11.4.3-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/ens-controller": "15.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/eth-json-rpc-provider": "4.1.6-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/gas-fee-controller": "22.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/json-rpc-engine": "10.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/json-rpc-middleware-stream": "8.0.5-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/keyring-controller": "18.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/logging-controller": "6.0.2-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/message-manager": "11.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/multichain": "0.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/name-controller": "8.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/network-controller": "22.0.2-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/notification-controller": "7.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/notification-services-controller": "0.13.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/permission-controller": "11.0.3-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/permission-log-controller": "3.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/phishing-controller": "12.3.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/polling-controller": "12.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/preferences-controller": "14.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/profile-sync-controller": "1.0.2-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/queued-request-controller": "7.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/rate-limit-controller": "6.0.1-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/selected-network-controller": "19.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/signature-controller": "22.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/transaction-controller": "39.0.0-preview-fcc71a0",
  "@metamask-previews/user-operation-controller": "18.0.0-preview-fcc71a0"
}

danjm

Everything looks good to me, except I have those last questions about the approach to error handling.

mcmire

Some more suggestions. After that I think we are good here.

packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/remote-feature-flag-controller.test.ts

...es/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/client-config-api-service/client-config-api-service.ts

...mote-feature-flag-controller/src/client-config-api-service/client-config-api-service.test.ts

...es/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/client-config-api-service/client-config-api-service.ts

danjm · 2024-11-27T20:46:43Z

I've coded a proposed alternative to service error handling, can be found here #4995

mcmire

A few more things, but this is looking pretty good otherwise!

packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/package.json

packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/logger.ts

mcmire · 2024-11-27T22:59:38Z

packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/logger.ts

+export const incomingTransactionsLogger = createModuleLogger(
+  projectLogger,
+  'remote-feature-flag',
+);


Hmm, I see that you copied this pattern from transaction-controller. It seems that they are putting all of their logger objects in this file. I guess that is okay — there isn't clear guidance on this. But should we at least name this variable and the scope appropriately?

Suggested change

export const incomingTransactionsLogger = createModuleLogger(

projectLogger,

'remote-feature-flag',

);

export const remoteFeatureFlagControllerLogger = createModuleLogger(

projectLogger,

'remote-feature-flag-controller',

);

As an alternative to this, you could put this variable at the top of remote-feature-flag-controller.ts itself and name it log, with the scope named after the class/function/file that's being logged. Here is another example to demonstrate this approach:

core/packages/name-controller/src/providers/etherscan.ts

Line 19 in 7a50963

const log = createModuleLogger(projectLogger, 'etherscan');

And so you could have a similar one for remote-feature-flag-controller like so:

export const log = createModuleLogger(projectLogger, 'RemoteFeatureFlagController');

Your second suggestion has been applied here 440d170

mcmire · 2024-11-27T23:04:17Z

packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/remote-feature-flag-controller.ts

+// === STATE ===
+
+export type RemoteFeatureFlagControllerState = {
+  remoteFeatureFlag: FeatureFlags;


I see that this was changed recently. Just want to double-check, should this be remoteFeatureFlags instead of remoteFeatureFlag, since there could be multiple?

Suggested change

remoteFeatureFlag: FeatureFlags;

remoteFeatureFlags: FeatureFlags;

Done in 8f3c4d5

mcmire · 2024-11-27T23:06:51Z

packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/remote-feature-flag-controller.ts

+    } catch (error) {
+      log('Remote feature flag API request failed: %o', error);
+      reject(error);
+      throw error;


It seems that we are returning the promise in the successful case but not the error case. So I see why you added this line. But since we have a promise that we are rejecting, it seems that we ought to be able to use it somehow for all cases...

What if instead of a try/catch we add this when we set up the promise above:

const { promise, resolve, reject } = createDeferredPromise<FeatureFlags>({ suppressUnhandledRejection: true, }); this.#inProgressFlagUpdate = promise; promise.finally(() => { this.#inProgressFlagUpdate = undefined; });

And now we can put return await promise as the very last thing in this method.

done in 9454a8f

mcmire · 2024-11-27T23:12:25Z

packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/remote-feature-flag-controller.ts

+
+export const controllerName = 'RemoteFeatureFlagController';
+export const DEFAULT_CACHE_DURATION = 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000; // 1 day
+const log = createModuleLogger(projectLogger, 'ClientConfigApiService');


Ah, I just noticed this. Perhaps we don't need the additional logger in logger.ts? Maybe we just need projectLogger there, and we can correct the scope of this logger:

Suggested change

const log = createModuleLogger(projectLogger, 'ClientConfigApiService');

const log = createModuleLogger(projectLogger, 'RemoteFeatureFlagController');

this was addressed in 440d170

mcmire · 2024-11-27T23:23:02Z

packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/remote-feature-flag-controller.ts

+   *
+   * @returns A promise that resolves to the current set of feature flags.
+   */
+  async getRemoteFeatureFlag(): Promise<FeatureFlags> {


Similar to a previous comment, did we want to use getRemoteFeatureFlags since we're potentially grabbing multiple? Or is this fine? Just wanted to double-check the API is the way we want it.

Pluralized in 8f3c4d5

…private: true` Co-authored-by: Elliot Winkler <[email protected]>

… name passed to createProjectLogger Co-authored-by: Elliot Winkler <[email protected]>

…flag controller

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch 6 times, most recently from 78af7f4 to cd93f7a Compare November 15, 2024 03:13

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch from cd93f7a to 82f7997 Compare November 16, 2024 03:42

DDDDDanica self-assigned this Nov 16, 2024

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch 2 times, most recently from 78ca22b to a7a3cf1 Compare November 19, 2024 11:53

DDDDDanica marked this pull request as ready for review November 19, 2024 23:04

DDDDDanica requested a review from a team as a code owner November 19, 2024 23:04

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch 9 times, most recently from 0519340 to fcc71a0 Compare November 20, 2024 12:19

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch 6 times, most recently from 153ebc9 to 0fab160 Compare November 21, 2024 21:20

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch from 977ddbf to 276357d Compare November 26, 2024 11:46

feat(27254): address feedback - round 2

b25f847

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch from 276357d to b25f847 Compare November 26, 2024 12:18

danjm and others added 2 commits November 26, 2024 09:27

Add jsdoc comments to remote-feature-flag-controller.ts

a8d53f3

feat(27254): fix lint errors for test file

a09cd92

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch from 7f893dc to a09cd92 Compare November 26, 2024 16:04

danjm requested changes Nov 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

joaoloureirop requested a review from a team November 26, 2024 19:27

joaoloureirop previously approved these changes Nov 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

mcmire reviewed Nov 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

Gudahtt reviewed Nov 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

...es/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/client-config-api-service/client-config-api-service.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Gudahtt reviewed Nov 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

...es/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/client-config-api-service/client-config-api-service.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

DDDDDanica dismissed joaoloureirop’s stale review via 41bb909 November 27, 2024 00:39

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch 6 times, most recently from f13e7b4 to 6ea8e51 Compare November 27, 2024 17:14

feat(27254): code review round 3

e5e0b5c

DDDDDanica force-pushed the feature/27254-feature-flag-controller branch from 6ea8e51 to e5e0b5c Compare November 27, 2024 22:41

feat(27254): add tests for controller for error catching

4429d10

mcmire reviewed Nov 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

danjm and others added 5 commits November 27, 2024 20:46

Update packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/package.json: remove `…

593cdd0

…private: true` Co-authored-by: Elliot Winkler <[email protected]>

Update packages/remote-feature-flag-controller/src/logger.ts: correct…

3cbaee6

… name passed to createProjectLogger Co-authored-by: Elliot Winkler <[email protected]>

create module logger within remote-feature-flag-controller.js itself

440d170

Pluralize variable/property names to better reflect the data

8f3c4d5

Simplify error handling and promise resolution within remote feature …

9454a8f

…flag controller

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat(27254): implement new remote-feature-flag-controller #4931

feat(27254): implement new remote-feature-flag-controller #4931

DDDDDanica commented Nov 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

socket-security bot commented Nov 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

DDDDDanica commented Nov 20, 2024

github-actions bot commented Nov 20, 2024

danjm left a comment

mcmire left a comment

danjm commented Nov 27, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mcmire left a comment

mcmire Nov 27, 2024 •

edited

Loading

danjm Nov 28, 2024

mcmire Nov 27, 2024

danjm Nov 28, 2024

mcmire Nov 27, 2024

danjm Nov 28, 2024

mcmire Nov 27, 2024

danjm Nov 28, 2024

mcmire Nov 27, 2024

danjm Nov 28, 2024

	remoteFeatureFlag: FeatureFlags;
	remoteFeatureFlags: FeatureFlags;

	const log = createModuleLogger(projectLogger, 'ClientConfigApiService');
	const log = createModuleLogger(projectLogger, 'RemoteFeatureFlagController');

feat(27254): implement new remote-feature-flag-controller #4931

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat(27254): implement new remote-feature-flag-controller #4931

Conversation

DDDDDanica commented Nov 14, 2024 • edited Loading

Explanation

References

Changelog

@metamask/remote-feature-flag-controller

Checklist

socket-security bot commented Nov 15, 2024 • edited Loading

DDDDDanica commented Nov 20, 2024

github-actions bot commented Nov 20, 2024

danjm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mcmire left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

danjm commented Nov 27, 2024 • edited Loading

mcmire left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mcmire Nov 27, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

DDDDDanica commented Nov 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

`@metamask/remote-feature-flag-controller`

socket-security bot commented Nov 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

danjm commented Nov 27, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mcmire Nov 27, 2024 •

edited

Loading