[java] Merge android specific parameters in chrome options

[iampopovich]

User description

Thanks for contributing to Selenium!
A PR well described will help maintainers to quickly review and merge it

Before submitting your PR, please check our contributing guidelines.
Avoid large PRs, help reviewers by making them as simple and short as possible.

Description

according to bug #14133 I added androidOptions to merge method ChromiumOptions.mergeInPlace
I also added a test for the new functionality.

Motivation and Context

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist

• I have read the contributing document.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

---

PR Type

Bug fix, Tests

---

Description

• Added merging of androidOptions in ChromiumOptions.mergeInPlace method to handle Android-specific parameters.
• Introduced a new test in ChromeOptionsTest to verify the correct merging of Android-specific options.

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

	Relevant files
Bug fix	ChromiumOptions.java Add merging of Android-specific options in ChromiumOptions java/src/org/openqa/selenium/chromium/ChromiumOptions.java Added merging of androidOptions in mergeInPlace method. Included a check for androidOptions before merging. +4/-0
Tests	ChromeOptionsTest.java Add test for merging Android-specific options in ChromeOptions java/test/org/openqa/selenium/chrome/ChromeOptionsTest.java Added a test to verify merging of Android-specific options. Ensured the test checks for equality of options after merging. +15/-0

---

💡 PR-Agent usage:
Comment /help on the PR to get a list of all available PR-Agent tools and their descriptions

[qodo-merge-pro]

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]	2
🧪 Relevant tests	Yes
🔒 Security concerns	No
⚡ Key issues to review	None

[qodo-merge-pro]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Category	Suggestion	Score
Possible bug	✅ Add null check for options to prevent NullPointerException Suggestion Impact: The commit added a null check for `options` before accessing `options.androidOptions`, which aligns with the suggestion to prevent potential NullPointerExceptions. code diff: - if (options.androidOptions != null) { - options.androidOptions.forEach(this::setAndroidCapability); - } + Optional.ofNullable(options.androidOptions) + .ifPresent(opts -> opts.forEach(this::setAndroidCapability)); Consider checking for nullity of options before accessing its properties to avoid potential NullPointerExceptions. This is crucial especially when dealing with optional capabilities that might not be initialized. java/src/org/openqa/selenium/chromium/ChromiumOptions.java [341-343] -if (options.androidOptions != null) { +if (options != null && options.androidOptions != null) { options.androidOptions.forEach(this::setAndroidCapability); } Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 9 Why: Adding a null check for options is crucial to prevent potential NullPointerExceptions, especially when dealing with optional capabilities that might not be initialized. This improves the robustness of the code.	9
Enhancement	✅ Improve assertion to provide detailed error messages Suggestion Impact: The commit replaced the assert statement using equals with assertEquals, which aligns with the suggestion to provide detailed error messages for assertion failures. code diff: - assert original.asMap().equals(merged.asMap()); - + assertEquals(original.asMap(), merged.asMap()); Use assertEquals instead of equals inside the assert statement to ensure that any assertion failure provides a clear and detailed message about the discrepancy between the expected and actual results. java/test/org/openqa/selenium/chrome/ChromeOptionsTest.java [397] -assert original.asMap().equals(merged.asMap()); +assertEquals(original.asMap(), merged.asMap()); Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 Why: Using assertEquals instead of equals inside the assert statement ensures that any assertion failure provides a clear and detailed message about the discrepancy between the expected and actual results, improving test diagnostics.	8
	Add detailed assertions for each property to ensure correct merging Add assertions to check individual properties of the merged capabilities to ensure that each property is correctly merged, especially focusing on Android-specific options. java/test/org/openqa/selenium/chrome/ChromeOptionsTest.java [395] var merged = original.merge(caps); +assertEquals("co_activity", merged.getAndroidActivity()); +assertEquals("co_package", merged.getAndroidPackage()); +assertEquals("co_experimental", merged.getExperimentalOption("experimental")); +assertTrue(merged.getArguments().contains("--co_argument")); Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: Adding assertions for individual properties of the merged capabilities ensures that each property is correctly merged, especially focusing on Android-specific options. This enhances the thoroughness of the test.	7
Best practice	✅ Use Optional for null-safe handling of androidOptions Suggestion Impact: The suggestion to use Optional for handling androidOptions was implemented in the commit. The code now uses Optional.ofNullable to check for null and process androidOptions if present. code diff: - if (options.androidOptions != null) { - options.androidOptions.forEach(this::setAndroidCapability); - } + Optional.ofNullable(options.androidOptions) + .ifPresent(opts -> opts.forEach(this::setAndroidCapability)); Consider using Optional for handling androidOptions to make the code more robust and idiomatic to Java 8 and above, avoiding direct null checks. java/src/org/openqa/selenium/chromium/ChromiumOptions.java [341-343] -if (options.androidOptions != null) { - options.androidOptions.forEach(this::setAndroidCapability); -} +Optional.ofNullable(options.androidOptions).ifPresent(opts -> opts.forEach(this::setAndroidCapability)); Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: Using Optional for handling androidOptions makes the code more robust and idiomatic to Java 8 and above, avoiding direct null checks. However, it is a stylistic improvement rather than a critical fix.	6

[diemol]

@iampopovich seems the tests cannot be built https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/selenium/actions/runs/9745320822/job/26892961031?pr=14217#step:15:725

[iampopovich]

@diemol my bad , i forgot to import assertEquals
fix's on the way

[diemol]

Did you run the build before?

Still getting errors: https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/selenium/actions/runs/9913402348/job/27390332113?pr=14217#step:15:482

[iampopovich]

@diemol i guess something happened with my working environment, and I missed another import. I also did not check the build in Gitpod.

Now i ran build with command bazel build //java/...
the build result is attached in the log below.
I apologize for the time wasted on such elementary mistakes.

INFO: Found 1725 targets...
INFO: Elapsed time: 175.258s, Critical Path: 126.66s
INFO: 5138 processes: 3723 internal, 548 darwin-sandbox, 1 local, 866 worker.
INFO: Build completed successfully, 5138 total actions

[diemol]

Thank you, @iampopovich!