feat: Allow routeNameExtractor to set transaction names

[JaspervanRiet]

📜 Description

This PR adds the functionality to have the routeNameExtractor override the route names logged in Sentry, which I personally think makes more sense. It does not make sense to me that this extractor would only affect breadcrumbs, which is the current state, see Motivation.

Note that this is currently technically a breaking change. I'm open to changing the PR to avoid that, but I'd say the decision on how to proceed there is best left to the maintainers of this project. :)

💡 Motivation and Context

Setting the routeNameExtractor of the SentryNavigatorObserver currently only affects breadcrumbs. For our app, this does not work. We use named routes with IDs to navigate to our pages, e.g. /movies/1500 to navigate to the detail page of a movie. We want to measure the performance of this whole group of pages instead of the unique instance. We thought we would be able to use the extractor to do this, but sadly not.

As for why I think this makes more sense: routeNameExtractor to me says that this functionality will allow you to mutate the route. Intuitively, that means this data will be used throughout the SentryNavigatorObserver; nothing about this signifies that this would only affect breadcrumbs. I see no discussion about this in the introducing PR (#684), so hard to say if this was thought about.

💚 How did you test it?

I used the current tests available for the observer, and added an extra test specific to this functionality since one was missing for the routeNameExtractor.

📝 Checklist

• I reviewed submitted code
• I added tests to verify changes
• I updated the docs if needed
• All tests passing
• No breaking changes

🔮 Next steps

[marandaneto]

@JaspervanRiet thanks for doing this.
I agree with the approach, makes sense.
I'd generify the code to call the _routeNameExtractor only once tho, right now it's being called multiple times in multiple places, better to just pass the routeName as a param to the methods.
It's a breaking change but I believe this was an oversight and it should be fixed, right now route names in crumbs and transactions might not be aligned if using the extractor.
What do you think @ueman ?

[ueman]

Yes, sounds reasonable to me, too.

[marandaneto]

@JaspervanRiet please add a changelog entry and we are ready to go :)

[JaspervanRiet]

@marandaneto Should be done!

[marandaneto]

Thanks @JaspervanRiet

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Base: 89.66% // Head: 89.66% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (3f0882f) compared to base (7987216).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1005   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   89.66%   89.66%           
=======================================
  Files         106      106           
  Lines        3329     3329           
=======================================
  Hits         2985     2985           
  Misses        344      344           

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[JaspervanRiet]

Thanks for quick handling of this PR :)