Backport to branch(3.16) : Deprecate --log-success argument and introduce new replacement option --enable-log-success

[feeblefakie]

This is an automated backport of the following:

• Original PR: Deprecate --log-success argument and introduce new replacement option --enable-log-success #3117
• Backported commit: d269d9d

Please merge this PR after all checks have passed.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @feeblefakie, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request backports a change to update the command-line interface for the data loader. It deprecates an existing argument for logging successful records and introduces a new, clearer argument to replace it. The changes ensure that the application handles both the old and new arguments gracefully, providing a smooth transition for users while maintaining robust input validation.

Highlights

• Argument Deprecation: The --log-success command-line argument has been deprecated. Users should now use the new --enable-log-success argument instead.
• New Argument Introduction: A new command-line argument, --enable-log-success (with short form -ls), has been introduced to replace the deprecated --log-success option for enabling logging of successfully processed records.
• Backward Compatibility: The system now includes validation to prevent users from specifying both the deprecated --log-success and the new --enable-log-success arguments simultaneously, throwing an exception if both are present. If only the deprecated option is used, its value is correctly applied to the new option.
• Test Coverage: New unit tests have been added to ensure the correct behavior of the deprecated and new arguments, covering scenarios where both are used, only the deprecated one is used, and the new one is used with its long and short forms.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request backports the deprecation of the --log-success argument, replacing it with --enable-log-success. The changes are well-implemented, including updates to command-line option handling, validation for using both old and new options, and comprehensive tests for the new behavior. My review includes a few suggestions for improvement, mainly concerning the accuracy of a Javadoc deprecation notice and enhancing the robustness and clarity of the new test cases.