Add Health Connect Syncing by GhostCodeByte · Pull Request #109 · LibreFitOrg/LibreFit

GhostCodeByte · 2026-06-26T20:54:38Z

What changed

This PR adds Health Connect synchronization for:

reading and writing body weight
reading and writing body fat
writing completed workoutsdddd

Details

Added one settings card per data type with separate Read and Write switches
Requests all supported Health Connect permissions when the integration is enabled for the first time
Prevents data imported from Health Connect from being written back
Limits reading and bulk synchronization to the last 30 days
Rounds imported body measurements to two decimal places
Handles removed Health Connect records without creating synchronization loops
Skips old workouts without real set timestamps instead of estimating them
Only exports workouts that contain complete and valid timestamps
Added an explicit Health Connect exercise type mapping for all 912 built-in exercises
Uses a safe fallback for custom exercises
Added the required English privacy information

Testing

Added focused tests for measurement synchronization, workout synchronization, permissions and exercise mapping
Validated the complete exercise dataset against its schema
All 89 unit tests pass
Successfully built the debug APK

Issue: #104

_{Health Connect permissions}	_{Privacy settings}	_{Settings toggle}

IamDg

Hi,

Thank you for your awesome contribution!

I'm kinda surprise by your work which is mostly correct and well implemented. Just correct/answer some points of the review and it should be ready to merge.

Regarding health connect in general, I looked up some info and documentation and you are right: a migration to timestamp is necessary to actually make integration possible. Since this is not a priority, I would be glad if you were willing to work on this also because you did a good job so far.

Let me know what do you think!

IamDg · 2026-07-07T22:40:53Z

+                healthConnectState.hasPermissions
+
+            when {
+                !healthConnectState.isAvailable -> Unit


What happens in this case?

IamDg · 2026-07-07T22:41:29Z

+            val isHealthConnectEnabled = healthConnectState.isEnabled &&
+                healthConnectState.hasPermissions
+
+            when {


Would be possible to move this logic in view model?

IamDg · 2026-07-07T22:43:11Z

-}
+}
+
+data class HealthConnectState(


This should be moved in a separated file. Also, maybe would be better an ENUM instead?

IamDg · 2026-07-07T22:45:49Z

+    val healthConnectState = _healthConnectState.asStateFlow()
+
+    init {
+        viewModelScope.launch {


Maybe I'm wrong but it looks like that a combine() can be used to merge _healthConnectState flow with userPreferences.healthConnectEnabled flow in a single one in order to avoid broken state or spaghetti updates.

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-08T09:21:23Z

Thanks, that’s really nice to hear. I’ve already implemented the changes, but I thought it would also be useful to make the settings configurable by scopes, such as read and write permissions for body metrics, as well as write permissions for exercises.

That way, everyone could adjust the permissions however they prefer. For this, it would be really nice to have a dropdown in the settings: when the main toggle is enabled, the dropdown could expand and show the different read and write toggles separately.

Do you have any thoughts or ideas on that?

IamDg · 2026-07-08T10:20:30Z

Thanks, that’s really nice to hear. I’ve already implemented the changes, but I thought it would also be useful to make the settings configurable by scopes, such as read and write permissions for body metrics, as well as write permissions for exercises.

That way, everyone could adjust the permissions however they prefer. For this, it would be really nice to have a dropdown in the settings: when the main toggle is enabled, the dropdown could expand and show the different read and write toggles separately.

Do you have any thoughts or ideas on that?

Since the long term plan is to implement health connect fully, I think it would be better to create a dedicated section in settings (e.g. called Health connect) which would contain all toggles.

IamDg

Great improvements here.

Try to keep classes separated from each other and in suitable location.

Also make the logic as simple and clear as possible (right now it's fine)

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-08T16:23:04Z

Since the long term plan is to implement health connect fully, I think it would be better to create a dedicated section in settings (e.g. called Health connect) which would contain all toggles.

Yeah, that makes sense. I just thought it might be better to hide the individual toggles as long as Health Connect is not activated, so the screen stays clean.

Should each sync option be its own card, or could we combine them into one card to make it more space-efficient?

The options shown could be:

Body weight (read / write)

Fat mass (read / write)

Lean mass (read / write)

Workouts (write)(I would not read workouts, since that does not really make sense and would create too many edge cases.)

Would you simplify this into fewer options, or would you show all of them?

IamDg · 2026-07-09T17:27:50Z

The options shown could be:

Body weight (read / write)

Fat mass (read / write)

Lean mass (read / write)

Workouts (write)(I would not read workouts, since that does not really make sense and would create too many edge cases.)

I think a card with write/read for each type, as you proposed, should do the job

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-12T10:23:31Z

@IamDg
I just created two possible UI options so you can share your thoughts before I finalize the implementation in the PR.

I think the option with a single card containing all sync settings underneath looks much better and is more space-efficient. However, it is also different from the rest of the settings page, which makes the design slightly less consistent.

In both options, the card would remain hidden as long as Health Connect is disabled.

Many other apps also include a “Manage permissions in Health Connect” button, which opens the Health Connect app so users can review and manage all permissions there. We could add something similar.

IamDg

Hi,

Thank you for your contribution!

I've left some comments to address. Now back to your question:

I think the option with a single card containing all sync settings underneath looks much better and is more space-efficient. However, it is also different from the rest of the settings page, which makes the design slightly less consistent.

In both options, the card would remain hidden as long as Health Connect is disabled.

Many other apps also include a “Manage permissions in Health Connect” button, which opens the Health Connect app so users can review and manage all permissions there. We could add something similar.

I'd opt for second option since as you said it's more consistent. Regarding the settings button, I think it would be a great addition. Furthermore, the official health connect icon looks better than the generic one

IamDg · 2026-07-15T13:38:06Z

+        .distinctUntilChanged()
+        .stateIn(
+            scope = viewModelScope,
+            started = SharingStarted.Eagerly,


is there a reasong why it's eagerly instead of subscribed? If not, I'd suggest the following

Suggested change

started = SharingStarted.Eagerly,

started = SharingStarted.WhileSubscribed(5_000),

IamDg · 2026-07-15T13:49:43Z

+        onHealthConnectClick = {
+            when (viewModel.onHealthConnectClick()) {
+                HealthConnectClickAction.REQUEST_PERMISSIONS -> {
+                    healthConnectPermissionLauncher.launch(viewModel.healthConnectPermissions)
+                }
+                HealthConnectClickAction.NONE -> Unit
+            }
+        },


According to official documentation, before launching the permission request, it should be explained the rationale. I think an dialog or modal bottom sheet (even use the LibreFit's ones) should do the job

IamDg · 2026-07-15T13:53:54Z

+        )
+
+    init {
+        refreshHealthConnectState()


These should be called after, for instance, app comes back from background to foreground. For this reason it should be considered adding an OnLifecycleEvent observer in SettingsScreen to call viewModel.refreshHealthConnectState() when the app comes back to the foreground.

IamDg · 2026-07-15T13:55:07Z

+
+    fun updateHealthConnectPermissions(grantedPermissions: Set<String>) {
+        viewModelScope.launch {
+            val hasPermissions = grantedPermissions.containsAll(healthConnectPermissions)


By using containsAll it means all permissions are mandatory? Maybe it's better checking one by one?

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-17T13:42:07Z

@IamDg

LibreFit currently stores the value entered as “Lean Mass” in the UI as muscleMassPercentage. However, lean body mass and muscle mass are not the same. My assumption is that the app is intended to store muscle mass and that only the UI label is incorrect, but please correct me if I’m mistaken.

This distinction matters for the Health Connect integration because Health Connect provides lean body mass in kilograms, not muscle mass as a percentage. I can address this as part of the current PR, or handle it separately if you would prefer to keep this one focused.

IamDg · 2026-07-18T11:02:21Z

LibreFit currently stores the value entered as “Lean Mass” in the UI as muscleMassPercentage. However, lean body mass and muscle mass are not the same. My assumption is that the app is intended to store muscle mass and that only the UI label is incorrect, but please correct me if I’m mistaken.

This distinction matters for the Health Connect integration because Health Connect provides lean body mass in kilograms, not muscle mass as a percentage. I can address this as part of the current PR, or handle it separately if you would prefer to keep this one focused.

This is a good point and thank you for asking clarification. The intention is to store muscle mass. The latter could be calculated by multiplying body mass and muscle mass percentage, right?

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-18T15:13:05Z

I would update the UI accordingly later to display muscle mass instead of lean mass. I checked again, and Health Connect only supports lean mass, not muscle mass in any form. So the most practical option is probably to remove it for now.

I was already thinking about making body fat and muscle mass optional in the settings, since many users do not have a scale that supports them, which would also simplify the UI. But that can be addressed later.

For now, we can only sync workouts, weight, and body fat percentage with Health Connect.

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-18T15:38:23Z

Older workouts do not have timestamps for individual sets. Should we estimate these timestamps when exporting them to Health Connect, or should we only sync new workouts that have real timestamps?

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-18T16:54:16Z

@IamDg

For the Health Connect workout export, I currently map LibreFit exercises to Health Connect types by checking keywords in their displayed names. For example, an exercise containing squat is exported as a squat, while unknown exercises use OTHER_WORKOUT.

After testing this against the 912 existing exercises, I found that this approach creates incorrect mappings:

Leg curls and wrist curls can be mapped as arm curls.
Exercises containing “throw”, “narrow” or “prowler” can be mapped as rows because those words contain row.
Some push-ups can be mapped as sit-ups.
Farmer’s Walk and Yoke Walk can be mapped as regular walking.

There are a few possible approaches:

Map LibreFit’s stable exercise IDs to Health Connect types. This is reliable for built-in exercises, but the mapping must be maintained when exercises are added.
Store a Health Connect type directly on every exercise. This would be the cleanest long-term solution, but requires a larger model/database change.
Only map exercises where the type is certain and use OTHER_WORKOUT for everything else. This loses some detail but avoids incorrect data.

I think storing a Health Connect type directly on every exercise would be the safest approach and i would let codex do the first run over all current exercises. Which solution would you prefer for this PR?

I'm sorry for the many questions i realy wanna get this right because its such a big implementation thank you for you patient.

IamDg · 2026-07-20T14:20:11Z

Older workouts do not have timestamps for individual sets. Should we estimate these timestamps when exporting them to Health Connect, or should we only sync new workouts that have real timestamps?

I would sync only workouts with timestamps.

For the Health Connect workout export, I currently map LibreFit exercises to Health Connect types by checking keywords in their displayed names. For example, an exercise containing squat is exported as a squat, while unknown exercises use OTHER_WORKOUT.

After testing this against the 912 existing exercises, I found that this approach creates incorrect mappings:

Leg curls and wrist curls can be mapped as arm curls.

Exercises containing “throw”, “narrow” or “prowler” can be mapped as rows because those words contain row.

Some push-ups can be mapped as sit-ups.

Farmer’s Walk and Yoke Walk can be mapped as regular walking.

There are a few possible approaches:

Map LibreFit’s stable exercise IDs to Health Connect types. This is reliable for built-in exercises, but the mapping must be maintained when exercises are added.

Store a Health Connect type directly on every exercise. This would be the cleanest long-term solution, but requires a larger model/database change.

Only map exercises where the type is certain and use OTHER_WORKOUT for everything else. This loses some detail but avoids incorrect data.

I think storing a Health Connect type directly on every exercise would be the safest approach and i would let codex do the first run over all current exercises. Which solution would you prefer for this PR?

I'm sorry for the many questions i realy wanna get this right because its such a big implementation thank you for you patient.

Go with second approach since it's the long term solution. Just be sure to follow official android documentation and minimize error rate of agent by using thinking, planning, skills or anything else.

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-23T15:27:36Z

@IamDg

I updated the PR and merged the current main branch.

Health Connect is now implemented for weight, body fat and workouts. Weight and body fat can be read and written, while completed workouts are write-only.

I changed the settings to one card per data type with separate Read and Write switches. Enabling Health Connect for the first time now requests all supported permissions together.

Data imported from Health Connect is not written back to it. The sync is limited to 30 days and imported body values are rounded to two decimal places.

Old workouts without real set timestamps are skipped, so only new workouts with complete timestamps are exported.

I also replaced the exercise name guessing with an explicit Health Connect exercise type for all 912 built-in exercises. Custom exercises use a safe fallback. The mappings and the complete exercise dataset are validated by tests.

Because main already uses database version 4, the Health Connect database change is now one migration from version 4 to 5.

All 89 unit tests pass and the debug APK builds successfully. Please let me know if you would prefer anything to be structured differently.

GhostCodeByte · 2026-07-23T15:30:34Z

i would test the APK myself for a few training sessions to see if everything is fine and report back after.

IamDg · 2026-07-26T18:05:13Z

Update lint_baseline so CI pass and I can download debug apk

feat: add initial Health Connect measurements export

2f20be4

GhostCodeByte mentioned this pull request Jun 26, 2026

Health Connect #104

Open

3 tasks

IamDg requested changes Jul 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

Implement requested changes

a9d6930

IamDg requested changes Jul 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread app/src/main/java/org/librefit/ui/screens/settings/HealthConnectState.kt Outdated

Comment thread app/src/main/java/org/librefit/ui/screens/settings/HealthConnectState.kt Outdated

Comment thread app/src/main/java/org/librefit/ui/models/HealthConnectState.kt

address requested changes

e1dbc3a

IamDg marked this pull request as ready for review July 15, 2026 11:30

IamDg marked this pull request as draft July 15, 2026 11:30

IamDg marked this pull request as ready for review July 15, 2026 11:34

IamDg marked this pull request as draft July 15, 2026 11:34

Merge branch 'main' into feature/health-connect-measurements

f1e7e8b

IamDg requested changes Jul 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

feat: complete Health Connect synchronization

44aa354

GhostCodeByte force-pushed the feature/health-connect-measurements branch from d1715e3 to 5bea01d Compare July 23, 2026 14:53

Merge LibreFitOrg/main into feature/health-connect-measurements

5bea01d

Update lint baseline

663423b

IamDg self-requested a review August 1, 2026 13:03

	started = SharingStarted.Eagerly,
	started = SharingStarted.WhileSubscribed(5_000),

Uh oh!

Conversation

GhostCodeByte commented Jun 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What changed

Details

Testing

Uh oh!

IamDg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 8, 2026

Uh oh!

IamDg commented Jul 8, 2026

Uh oh!

IamDg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 8, 2026

Uh oh!

IamDg commented Jul 9, 2026

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 12, 2026

Uh oh!

IamDg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

IamDg commented Jul 18, 2026

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 18, 2026

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 18, 2026

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 18, 2026

Uh oh!

IamDg commented Jul 20, 2026

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 23, 2026

Uh oh!

GhostCodeByte commented Jul 23, 2026

Uh oh!

IamDg commented Jul 26, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

GhostCodeByte commented Jun 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading