Refactor node selection to use node URL instead of ID

[DRadmir]

Updated NodeSelectedRecord and related store/service logic to use nodeUrl as the primary reference instead of nodeId. Added a migration to update the database schema accordingly. Adjusted NodeService and NodeStore APIs to reflect this change and added new tests for node selection behavior.

Fix: #1541

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @DRadmir, 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 significantly refactors the application's node selection and persistence strategy. By transitioning from an internal node ID to the node's URL as the primary reference, the system gains a more direct and consistent way to identify and manage selected nodes. This change impacts the database schema, service layer, and storage logic, all of which have been updated to align with the new approach, including a necessary database migration and new unit tests.

Highlights

• Node Selection Logic Refactor: The core node selection mechanism has been refactored to use nodeUrl as the primary identifier instead of nodeId in NodeSelectedRecord and related logic.
• Database Migration: A new database migration has been added to update the schema for NodeSelectedRecord, ensuring existing data is correctly migrated to use nodeUrl.
• API Adjustments: The NodeService and NodeStore APIs have been updated to reflect the change from nodeId to nodeUrl, simplifying interactions with selected nodes.
• New Test Coverage: New tests have been introduced for ChainSettingsSceneViewModel to validate the updated node selection behavior, ensuring functionality remains robust.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

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 refactors node selection to use the node's URL instead of an ID, which simplifies the storage logic. The changes include updating the database schema with a migration, modifying the NodeService and NodeStore APIs, and adding new tests for the selection behavior. The refactoring is well-executed, but I've identified a few areas for improvement regarding data integrity, performance, and the robustness of the database migration. My comments provide specific suggestions to address these points.