feat: SDKE-221 Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity type #1052

rmi22186 · 2025-08-12T02:09:00Z

Instructions

PR target branch should be against development
PR title name should follow this format: https://github.com/mParticle/mparticle-workflows/blob/main/.github/workflows/pr-title-check.yml
PR branch prefix should follow this format: https://github.com/mParticle/mparticle-workflows/blob/main/.github/workflows/pr-branch-check-name.yml

Summary

In this PR, we make an identify call if emailsha256 passed to selectPlacement differs from the other identity value.

Testing Plan

Was this tested locally? If not, explain why.
Integration tests and tested in an app

Reference Issue (For mParticle employees only. Ignore if you are an outside contributor)

Closes https://go.mparticle.com/work/SQDSDKS-7619

sonarqubecloud · 2025-08-12T02:09:45Z

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
64.4% Duplication on New Code (required ≤ 3%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

BrandonStalnaker · 2025-08-14T13:27:05Z

src/roktManager.ts

+                        this.identityService.identify({
+                            userIdentities: {
+                                ...currentUserIdentities,
+                                other: newEmailSha256 as string


With Web you can identify with more than 1 identity at a time right? I just think if you need to identify with either you should just identify with both rather than possibly identifying twice.

BrandonStalnaker · 2025-09-18T19:04:12Z

src/roktManager.ts

+                newHashedEmail = mappedAttributes['emailsha256'] as string || undefined;
+            }
+
+            const emailChanged = !!(newEmail && (!currentEmail || currentEmail !== newEmail));


So !! is a double not right so it doesn't invert like not(!), it just converts to a boolean?

So this would be = ((newEmail != nil && currentEmail == nil) || (newEmail != nil && currentEmail !== newEmail))

BrandonStalnaker

Looks good as long as my understanding of the logic is right

Mansi-mParticle

Logic looks good to me

src/roktManager.ts

alexs-mparticle · 2025-09-18T19:42:17Z

src/roktManager.ts

    ): void {
        const { userAttributeFilters, settings } = roktConfig || {};
        const { placementAttributesMapping } = settings || {};
+        this.configSettings = settings;


If configSettings is just a copy of settings, we should move it above the extraction of placementAttributesMapping, and combine the destructuring of placementAttributesMapping and hashedEmailUserIdentityType.

@alexs-mparticle not sure I follow. Destructuring hashedEmaiLuserIdenittyType from settings so that I can use it in selectPlacements would require me to place a new setting on the Rokt class. Is that what you are suggesting? It's not used in the current init function

If you do this here:

const { userAttributeFilters, settings } = roktConfig || {}; const { placementAttributesMapping, hashedEmailUserIdentityType } = settings || {};

Then you can avoid doing this later in the file:

const { hashedEmailUserIdentityType = null } = this.configSettings || {};

And then we don't need to store configSettings on this.

Closing the loop here - confirmed with Alex that we shodl set it on the Rokt Class and not just destructure it so it can be used later.

alexs-mparticle · 2025-09-18T19:43:49Z

src/roktManager.ts

+                newHashedEmail = mappedAttributes['emailsha256'] as string || undefined;
+            }
+
+            const emailChanged = !!(newEmail && (!currentEmail || currentEmail !== newEmail));


I would avoid using double bang (!!) in these checks because it makes it hard to read what's going on here. I think we created https://go.mparticle.com/work/SQDSDKS-7338 to refactor this into something readable, so now would be a great time to clean this up.

src/roktManager.ts

rmi22186 · 2025-09-23T01:48:09Z

@alexs-mparticle please take another look

src/roktManager.ts

alexs-mparticle · 2025-09-23T18:04:45Z

test/jest/roktManager.spec.ts

+            // Reset mocks
+            jest.clearAllMocks();


Do you still need to do this since it's in the beforeEach?

Suggested change

// Reset mocks

jest.clearAllMocks();

…anager

Co-authored-by: Alex S <[email protected]>

…ected current identity type

sonarqubecloud · 2025-11-03T13:32:07Z

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
26.5% Duplication on New Code (required ≤ 3%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

# [2.50.0](v2.49.0...v2.50.0) (2025-11-13) ### Features * SDKE-221 Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity type ([#1052](#1052)) ([3fb8cb1](3fb8cb1))

mparticle-automation · 2025-11-13T14:28:00Z

🎉 This PR is included in version 2.50.0 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

rmi22186 requested review from BrandonStalnaker, Mansi-mParticle and alexs-mparticle August 12, 2025 02:09

rmi22186 changed the title ~~feat: Map emailsha256 to other identity~~ feat: Identify if emailsha256 from selectPlacements differs from 'other' identity Aug 12, 2025

BrandonStalnaker requested changes Aug 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

rmi22186 changed the title ~~feat: Identify if emailsha256 from selectPlacements differs from 'other' identity~~ feat: Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity types Sep 18, 2025

rmi22186 requested a review from BrandonStalnaker September 18, 2025 18:36

rmi22186 changed the title ~~feat: Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity types~~ feat: Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity type Sep 18, 2025

rmi22186 changed the title ~~feat: Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity type~~ feat: SDKE-221 Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity type Sep 18, 2025

BrandonStalnaker reviewed Sep 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

BrandonStalnaker approved these changes Sep 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

Mansi-mParticle approved these changes Sep 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

alexs-mparticle requested changes Sep 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

rmi22186 force-pushed the fix/SQDSDKS-7619-compare-emailsha256-with-other branch from a729496 to bd7785f Compare September 23, 2025 01:39

alexs-mparticle reviewed Sep 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/roktManager.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

alexs-mparticle reviewed Sep 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/roktManager.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

alexs-mparticle reviewed Sep 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/roktManager.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

alexs-mparticle requested changes Sep 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

alexs-mparticle approved these changes Sep 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

rmi22186 and others added 9 commits November 3, 2025 08:30

feat: map emailsha256 to other

38ec20f

add another test

f10c8cc

Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType

be29a43

turn comments

20a9e59

fix tests

db5c97f

Set only hashedEmailUserIdentityType and not configsettings on rokt m…

3b71618

…anager

add normalizedHashedEmailUserIdentityType to class, fix tests

39171bc

rename mappedEmailShaIdentityType for conciseness

19ab1df

Apply suggestion from @alexs-mparticle

f718243

Co-authored-by: Alex S <[email protected]>

rmi22186 added 2 commits November 3, 2025 08:30

remove clearallmocks from individual tests

d1e0486

add logic for newHashedemail to consider if attributes passed the sel…

2581309

…ected current identity type

rmi22186 force-pushed the fix/SQDSDKS-7619-compare-emailsha256-with-other branch from d6ccdfa to 2581309 Compare November 3, 2025 13:31

rmi22186 merged commit 3fb8cb1 into development Nov 12, 2025
27 of 31 checks passed

mparticle-automation added the released label Nov 13, 2025

feat: SDKE-221 Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity type #1052

feat: SDKE-221 Support hashedEmailUserIdentityType for "other" identity type #1052

Uh oh!

Conversation

rmi22186 commented Aug 12, 2025

Instructions

Summary

Testing Plan

Reference Issue (For mParticle employees only. Ignore if you are an outside contributor)

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud bot commented Aug 12, 2025

Quality Gate failed

Uh oh!

BrandonStalnaker Aug 14, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrandonStalnaker Sep 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrandonStalnaker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Mansi-mParticle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

alexs-mparticle Sep 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rmi22186 Sep 23, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexs-mparticle Sep 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rmi22186 Sep 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexs-mparticle Sep 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rmi22186 commented Sep 23, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

alexs-mparticle Sep 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud bot commented Nov 3, 2025

Quality Gate failed

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mparticle-automation commented Nov 13, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

rmi22186 Sep 23, 2025 •

edited

Loading