[leoromanovsky]

What Does This Do

Adds per-subject experimentation opt-out to the standalone and legacy OpenFeature providers.
Set DD_FEATURE_FLAGS_EXPERIMENTATION_OPT_OUT_MODE before constructing the provider:

Mode	Behavior
disabled (default)	Ignore the subject's opt-out attribute.
immediate	Skip exposure-logging allocations, then continue ordinary delivery.
future_experiments_only	Retain allocations activated before the cutoff; exclude equal, later, or unknown activation.

Set dd_experimentation_opt_out_at to a timestamp in the subject's evaluation context. Omit it for eligible subjects.
Explicit Provider.Options.experimentationOptOutMode(...) overrides configuration. The provider resolves the mode at construction.

Enabled modes reject malformed subject timestamps with INVALID_CONTEXT.
Malformed activation returns PARSE_ERROR only for effective future mode with a valid subject cutoff, including unreachable allocations.
Disabled mode, immediate mode, and absent-cutoff evaluation preserve ordinary behavior.
Activation timestamps are parsed once. Inactive evaluation skips the exclusion helper.

Motivation

Subjects must be able to leave experimentation while retaining ordinary feature delivery.
Both providers now follow the shared decisions from the merged browser and Go implementations.

Validation

Tested commit	Validation	Result
DataDog/dd-trace-java@578ffa77cbc52e6d5d8950657a05863a449f59ab	System tests: legacy provider, Lean opt-out policy, context recovery, lookup precedence, exposures, and evaluation telemetry; Linux/amd64; harness 23b69bd59edaf9a6a3fdc71873d18d14616f550c	21 passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped; 252 materializations of 90 Lean policy cases across three modes
DataDog/dd-trace-java@a4d3dfb21cec0658417d4f3842dc8c8465a27371	System tests: standalone policy, public HTTP configuration, retained exposures, deduplication, and local TLS intake; Linux/amd64	5 passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped; 90 policy cases; deduplication and telemetry suppression verified
DataDog/dd-trace-java@a4d3dfb21cec0658417d4f3842dc8c8465a27371	System tests: standalone Remote Configuration with the current agent	5 failed: inherited missing bridge; supported HTTP path passed above

Contributor Checklist

• Format the title according to the contribution guidelines
• Assign the type: and (comp: or inst:) labels in addition to any other useful labels
• Avoid using close, fix, or any linking keywords when referencing an issue. Use solves instead, and assign the PR milestone to the issue.
• Update the CODEOWNERS file on source file addition, migration, or deletion
• Update public documentation with any new configuration flags or behaviors
• Once approved, use merge queue to merge the PR

Jira ticket: FFLSDK-258

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1]

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 25.00%
• Overall Coverage: 59.83% (-0.01%)

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 578ffa7 | Docs | Give us feedback!}

[dd-octo-sts]

🟢 Java Benchmark SLOs — All performance SLOs passed

Suite	Status
Startup	🟢 pass

SLO thresholds are defined here based on automatically generated metrics. A warning is raised when results are within 5% of the threshold.

PR vs. master results

Scenario	Candidate	master	Δ (95% CI of mean)
startup:insecure-bank:iast:Agent	14.78 s	14.57 s	[+0.6%; +2.2%] (maybe worse)
startup:insecure-bank:tracing:Agent	13.61 s	13.67 s	[-1.5%; +0.5%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:appsec:Agent	16.60 s	16.99 s	[-6.9%; +2.2%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:iast:Agent	16.92 s	17.06 s	[-1.8%; +0.1%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:profiling:Agent	16.74 s	16.72 s	[-0.8%; +1.0%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:sca:Agent	17.11 s	16.80 s	[+0.9%; +2.8%] (maybe worse)
startup:petclinic:tracing:Agent	15.76 s	16.21 s	[-6.9%; +1.3%] (no difference)

Commit: 578ffa77 · CI Pipeline · Benchmarking Platform UI

---

Load and DaCapo benchmarks can be triggered manually in the GitLab pipeline. Results will appear in the Benchmarking Platform UI after completion.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-21T22:53:27.977082Z	660b5b9	Draft marked ready
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-21T22:52:54.144234Z	660b5b9	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1]

More details

Both providers preserve ordinary fallback delivery when experiment allocations are excluded, and malformed activation metadata is isolated to the affected flag. Validation was limited to static review.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎

_{Open Bits AI session}

_{🤖 Bits Code Review · Commit 660b5b9}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 660b5b9611

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".