Let each channel update only from itself, with nothing to choose

The updater took the channel from a setting, so a production install could be pointed at dev builds and vice versa. That setting was the only thing standing between a phone and the wrong line of builds, and it was a chip you could tap by accident. The channel is now a property of the running APK and nothing else. The app reads the -dev suffix in its own versionName, asks that channel and no other, and then checks again at the point of decision — a release belonging to the other channel is refused whatever came back from the fetch. There is no preference, no key in the DataStore, and no way to cross over. Crossing over was never an upgrade in the first place. The two channels are counted by different workflows and their numbers are unrelated: dev is on 69 while production is on 40, so "newer" means nothing across the divide. They are separate apps under separate applicationIds, so having both is a matter of installing both, and each then keeps itself current. The rule is now a pure function with no Android in it — update/UpdatePolicy.kt — so it is unit-tested on the JVM like the rules engines are, rather than being buried in a class that needs an Activity. UpdatePolicyTest holds the wall: a dev install is refused a production build and a production install a dev one, at every version number including the ones where the two sequences overlap. The settings screen states which build is running and where its updates come from. It no longer offers a switch, because there is no longer one to offer. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01DCuRESmSZeJoJond43itw2
2026-08-08 03:24:48 +00:00
parent 71e000a428
commit 3372adf87a
6 changed files with 325 additions and 156 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
+package org.prolibertate.games.update
+
+import org.junit.Assert.assertEquals
+import org.junit.Assert.assertNull
+import org.junit.Assert.assertTrue
+import org.junit.Test
+
+/**
+ * The wall between the two channels.
+ *
+ * A dev install may only ever be offered dev builds and a production install
+ * production ones. There is no setting for it, so the only way this can go
+ * wrong now is here.
+ */
+class UpdatePolicyTest {
+
+    private fun release(
+        tag: String,
+        versionCode: Int,
+        channel: UpdateChannel,
+    ) = Release(
+        tag = tag,
+        versionCode = versionCode,
+        apkUrl = "https://example.invalid/$tag.apk",
+        apkName = "ProLibertateGames-$tag.apk",
+        channel = channel,
+    )
+
+    private val devBuild = release("v1.1.69-dev", 69, UpdateChannel.DEV)
+    private val productionBuild = release("v1.1.40", 40, UpdateChannel.PRODUCTION)
+
+    // -- Reading what a build is --------------------------------------------
+
+    @Test
+    fun `a version name says which channel it belongs to`() {
+        assertEquals(UpdateChannel.DEV, channelOfVersionName("1.1.69-dev"))
+        assertEquals(UpdateChannel.PRODUCTION, channelOfVersionName("1.1.40"))
+    }
+
+    @Test
+    fun `either mark is enough to make a release a dev build`() {
+        assertEquals(UpdateChannel.DEV, channelOfTag("v1.1.69-dev", prerelease = false))
+        assertEquals(UpdateChannel.DEV, channelOfTag("v1.1.69", prerelease = true))
+        assertEquals(UpdateChannel.PRODUCTION, channelOfTag("v1.1.40", prerelease = false))
+    }
+
+    @Test
+    fun `only the run number is read from a tag`() {
+        assertEquals(69, versionCodeOfTag("v1.1.69-dev"))
+        assertEquals(40, versionCodeOfTag("v1.1.40"))
+        // A series bump must never read as a downgrade.
+        assertTrue(versionCodeOfTag("v2.0.41")!! > versionCodeOfTag("v1.1.40")!!)
+        assertNull(versionCodeOfTag("nightly"))
+    }
+
+    // -- The wall -----------------------------------------------------------
+
+    @Test
+    fun `a dev install is never offered a production build`() {
+        val verdict = verdictFor(
+            latest = productionBuild,
+            installedChannel = UpdateChannel.DEV,
+            // Deliberately far behind: even a much "newer" number on the other
+            // channel must not get through, because the numbers are unrelated.
+            installedVersionCode = 1,
+        )
+        assertTrue("a dev install was offered $productionBuild", verdict is UpdateVerdict.Refused)
+    }
+
+    @Test
+    fun `a production install is never offered a dev build`() {
+        val verdict = verdictFor(
+            latest = devBuild,
+            installedChannel = UpdateChannel.PRODUCTION,
+            installedVersionCode = 1,
+        )
+        assertTrue("a production install was offered $devBuild", verdict is UpdateVerdict.Refused)
+    }
+
+    // -- Within a channel ---------------------------------------------------
+
+    @Test
+    fun `a newer build on the same channel is offered`() {
+        assertEquals(
+            UpdateVerdict.Install(devBuild),
+            verdictFor(devBuild, UpdateChannel.DEV, installedVersionCode = 62),
+        )
+        assertEquals(
+            UpdateVerdict.Install(productionBuild),
+            verdictFor(productionBuild, UpdateChannel.PRODUCTION, installedVersionCode = 39),
+        )
+    }
+
+    @Test
+    fun `the same build is not offered to itself`() {
+        assertEquals(
+            UpdateVerdict.UpToDate,
+            verdictFor(devBuild, UpdateChannel.DEV, installedVersionCode = 69),
+        )
+    }
+
+    @Test
+    fun `an older build is not offered`() {
+        assertEquals(
+            UpdateVerdict.UpToDate,
+            verdictFor(devBuild, UpdateChannel.DEV, installedVersionCode = 70),
+        )
+    }
+
+    @Test
+    fun `nothing published yet says so rather than failing silently`() {
+        val verdict = verdictFor(null, UpdateChannel.DEV, installedVersionCode = 69)
+        assertTrue(verdict is UpdateVerdict.Refused)
+        assertTrue(
+            "the reason should name the channel: ${(verdict as UpdateVerdict.Refused).reason}",
+            verdict.reason.contains("dev"),
+        )
+    }
+
+    /**
+     * The two sequences genuinely overlap — production is on 40 while dev is on
+     * 69 — so a build's own number is meaningless on the other channel. This is
+     * the case the old channel picker could produce and this one cannot.
+     */
+    @Test
+    fun `overlapping version numbers never cross the channels`() {
+        listOf(1, 40, 69, 200).forEach { installed ->
+            assertTrue(
+                "production build offered to a dev install on $installed",
+                verdictFor(productionBuild, UpdateChannel.DEV, installed)
+                    is UpdateVerdict.Refused,
+            )
+            assertTrue(
+                "dev build offered to a production install on $installed",
+                verdictFor(devBuild, UpdateChannel.PRODUCTION, installed)
+                    is UpdateVerdict.Refused,
+            )
+        }
+    }
+}