fix: Multiple attachments support for feedback

[tustanivsky]

📜 Description

Updated SentryFeedback to accept [Attachment] objects instead of raw [Data] arrays, enabling proper support for
multiple attachments with full metadata (filename, content type, etc.).

This also introduces some breaking changes to public API:

• init method signature
• dataDictionary() method now returns attachments as [[String: Any]] with metadata instead of [Data] affecting consumers of the onSubmitSuccess callback

This issue originally came up in Unreal SDK while adding attachment support for user feedback:

• Add attachments support for user feedback sentry-unreal#1121

💡 Motivation and Context

The previous implementation had several limitations:

1. Hardcoded metadata: attachmentsForEnvelope() assumed all attachments were screenshots and hardcoded filename: "screenshot.png" and contentType: "application/png"
2. Single attachment limitation: Only the first attachment was processed despite accepting an array
3. Lost metadata: Converting Attachment → Data → Attachment discarded important information like custom filenames and content types
4. Backend supports multiple: The Sentry backend can successfully process and display multiple feedback attachments, but the SDK wasn't taking advantage of this

💚 How did you test it?

• Added/updated tests
• Manually using Unreal SDK sample project.

📝 Checklist

You have to check all boxes before merging:

• I added tests to verify the changes.
• No new PII added or SDK only sends newly added PII if sendDefaultPII is enabled.
• I updated the docs if needed.
• I updated the wizard if needed.
• Review from the native team if needed.
• No breaking change or entry added to the changelog.
• No breaking change for hybrid SDKs or communicated to hybrid SDKs.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 13.33333% with 13 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 85.105%. Comparing base (68d6f41) to head (f2f059c).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ift/Integrations/UserFeedback/SentryFeedback.swift	16.666%	10 Missing ⚠️
...UserFeedback/SentryUserFeedbackFormViewModel.swift	0.000%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##              main     #6459       +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage   85.145%   85.105%   -0.041%     
=============================================
  Files          453       453               
  Lines        27689     27695        +6     
  Branches     12111     12118        +7     
=============================================
- Hits         23576     23570        -6     
- Misses        4069      4082       +13     
+ Partials        44        43        -1     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...UserFeedback/SentryUserFeedbackFormViewModel.swift	84.384% <0.000%> (ø)
...ift/Integrations/UserFeedback/SentryFeedback.swift	59.183% <16.666%> (-15.235%)	⬇️

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 68d6f41...f2f059c. Read the comment docs.

[itaybre]

(Closed and reopened this to retrigger workflows)

[tustanivsky]

(Closed and reopened this to retrigger workflows)

@itaybre Apparently running workflows require manual approval

[philprime]

LGTM, thank you

[philprime]

Looks like you need to fix the Changelog due to the alpha release of v9

[tustanivsky]

Looks like you need to fix the Changelog due to the alpha release of v9

Right, moved the new changelog entry to Unreleased section (d5d2e20).

[tustanivsky]

@philprime I see that some CI checks are failing due to the missing ready-to-merge label - not sure if it needs to be added manually or is handled by some automation.

[philprime]

I'll try to push a commit to this PR so hopefully it uses my permissions and exposes the GitHub secrets

[philprime]

We probably have to reopen this PR as soon as you repo write access

[tustanivsky]

We probably have to reopen this PR as soon as you repo write access

Right, I’ll re-create it once I receive the invite (still waiting for it)

[tustanivsky]

Superseded by #6752