Skip to content

Conversation

@antonis
Copy link
Contributor

@antonis antonis commented Dec 12, 2025

📜 Description

💡 Motivation and Context

See #6942 (comment)

This is a swift improvement as a follow up to the above review feedback. It is not required thus feel free to reject/close the PR if the (breaking) change is not desired.

💚 How did you test it?

  • Manual
  • Added unit tests

📝 Checklist

You have to check all boxes before merging:

  • I added tests to verify the changes.
  • No new PII added or SDK only sends newly added PII if sendDefaultPII is enabled.
  • I updated the docs if needed.
  • I updated the wizard if needed.
  • Review from the native team if needed.
  • No breaking change or entry added to the changelog.
  • No breaking change for hybrid SDKs or communicated to hybrid SDKs.

#skip-changelog

Closes #7038


### Breaking Changes

- Bumped minimum macOS version from 10.14.0 to 10.15.0
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

h: We can not do this due to #6758

Copy link
Contributor Author

@antonis antonis Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for the feedback. Given that the CryptoKit API is not available I suggest to close the PR. I've also added the Blocked label

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can't we use it for newer macOS versions?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess we can conditionally use CryptoKit and fallback to CommonCrypto when not available.
I think this would make things more complicated though and beat the purpose of using a simpler Swift friendly syntax.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If there is not clear advantage to conditionally use CryptoKit let's not do this change.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds good 👍
I'm closing this PR. We can revisit it when bumping macos is possible.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 12, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 84.690%. Comparing base (47a1684) to head (e311f4f).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##              main     #7037       +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage   85.027%   84.690%   -0.337%     
=============================================
  Files          454       449        -5     
  Lines        27737     27415      -322     
  Branches     12159     12003      -156     
=============================================
- Hits         23584     23218      -366     
- Misses        4107      4150       +43     
- Partials        46        47        +1     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
Sources/Swift/SentryDsn.swift 92.307% <100.000%> (+2.724%) ⬆️

... and 71 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 47a1684...e311f4f. Read the comment docs.

@antonis antonis closed this Dec 16, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

ref: Use CryptoKit instead of CommonCrypto in SentryDsn

3 participants