Backport to branch(3.16) : Add deprecated Data Loader CLI arguments

[feeblefakie]

This is an automated backport of the following:

• Original PR: Add deprecated Data Loader CLI arguments #3041
• Backported commit: 7a43860

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 backport introduces support for deprecated command-line interface arguments in the Data Loader's export and import functionalities. It allows users to continue using older options while gracefully transitioning to new, more descriptive ones. The changes include robust validation to prevent conflicts when both old and new options are provided, and logic to correctly interpret deprecated options by mapping them to their modern equivalents, ensuring a smooth upgrade path for users.

Highlights

• Deprecated CLI Arguments: Introduced support for deprecated command-line arguments in both the Data Loader's export and import commands to maintain backward compatibility.
• Option Conflict Validation: Implemented validation logic to prevent users from specifying both a deprecated option and its new replacement simultaneously, throwing an error if a conflict is detected.
• Value Application for Deprecated Options: Added mechanisms to correctly interpret and apply values from deprecated options by mapping them to their corresponding new options, including inverted logic where necessary (e.g., exclusive to inclusive scans).
• Comprehensive Testing: Included extensive unit tests for the new validation and application logic across export, import, and utility classes to ensure robustness and correct behavior.

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 correctly implements backward compatibility for deprecated CLI arguments by introducing new arguments, validating their usage, and providing a smooth transition. The changes are well-structured across command, options, and utility classes. The addition of a new error message and comprehensive unit tests for the new logic is commendable. However, I found a couple of issues in the new tests that would cause them to fail due to a NullPointerException. Please see my specific comments for details and suggestions for fixing them.