Closed supervacuus closed 2 weeks ago
I don't know the best approach to passing the option down (
sentry-dotnet
->sentry-android
->sentry-native
), so I would leave that aspect up to the downstream maintainers.
@kahest @bitsandfoxes we could pass it in via the SentryOptions when initialising the sentry-native
integration...
we could pass it in via the SentryOptions when initialising the sentry-native integration...
Sounds straight forward to me. We've got the native options ready to go.
fyi @markushi
This is a new requirement from using the
inproc
backend in the dotnet runtime (viasentry-android
). A detailed explanation of the behavior is here: https://github.com/dotnet/android/issues/9055#issuecomment-2261347912There are multiple ways to implement this, but since this need is currently only coming from this particular use case and we are a transitive dependency via vanilla
sentry-android
, we can't expose it as a build parameter. So, I propose adding a boolean option to continue the signal chain at the start (rather than at the end) of theinproc
handler. I could also imagine introducing an enum (instead of a boolean) to make this more generic and extensible (something likeinproc_handler_strategy
...).I don't know the best approach to passing the option down (
sentry-dotnet
->sentry-android
->sentry-native
), so I would leave that aspect up to the downstream maintainers.Another aspect that must be coordinated with downstream maintainers is the actual end-to-end test in a Maui app because my preliminary tests only ran with dotnet on Linux. I have no reason to believe that the runtime behaves differently on Android, but given that Android introduces quite a few offsets to "normal" Linux wrt to signal propagation, this should be verified by updating the sequence of downstream SDKs for an end-to-end test.
cc: @kahest, @bitsandfoxes, @jamescrosswell