Skip to content

feat: add Samsung TV Tizen ID support - #31

Closed
ignacio-rokt wants to merge 2 commits into
mParticle:mainfrom
ignacio-rokt:feat/identity-2222-samsung-tv-tizen-id
Closed

feat: add Samsung TV Tizen ID support#31
ignacio-rokt wants to merge 2 commits into
mParticle:mainfrom
ignacio-rokt:feat/identity-2222-samsung-tv-tizen-id

Conversation

@ignacio-rokt

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • Add SAMSUNG_TV("samsung_tv") to DeviceInformation.PlatformEnum so Java SDK callers can send Samsung TV batches.
  • Add tizen_advertising_id support on DeviceInformation via fluent setter, getter, setter, equality, hashCode, and toString.
  • Add unit coverage for the Samsung TV enum mapping and Tizen Advertising ID JSON serialization/deserialization.

Testing Plan

  • git diff --check
  • Attempted ./gradlew test, but local execution is blocked because this shell has no Java runtime installed and the checked-in wrapper uses CRLF line endings (/bin/sh^M). CI should run the Gradle test suite.

Reference Issue

@cursor

cursor Bot commented Sep 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

PR Summary

Low Risk
Backward-compatible additive changes to a generated-style model and a focused unit test; no auth or ingestion pipeline logic is modified.

Overview
Extends the Java SDK device payload model so server-side and batch uploads can represent Samsung TV (Tizen) clients the same way other TV platforms already do.

DeviceInformation gains SAMSUNG_TV (samsung_tv) on PlatformEnum, plus a tizen_advertising_id field with Gson serialization, fluent setters, and updates to equals / hashCode / toString.

EventsApiTest adds deviceInformationSupportsSamsungTvTizenAdvertisingId, covering enum fromValue, accessors, and Gson round-trip for the new field.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 253b1b6. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

@ignacio-rokt

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author
image

@ignacio-rokt
ignacio-rokt force-pushed the feat/identity-2222-samsung-tv-tizen-id branch from 96fa4f2 to e230353 Compare September 2, 2026 20:02

@jamesnrokt jamesnrokt left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hey @ignacio-rokt, the PR is hard to review in its current form — both files got converted from LF to CRLF, so every line shows as changed. Please could you update?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants