feat: Remove xcode projects from all kits

[denischilik]

Background

• As a team we decided to not support distribution as .xcframework

What Has Changed

• Remove all xcodeprojects which were used to generate frameworks
• Remove plist files related to xcode projects
• Remove jobs related to xcodeproj files

Screenshots/Video

• {Include any screenshots or video demonstrating the new feature or fix, if applicable}

Checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my own code.
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation.
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
• I have tested this locally.

Additional Notes

• {Any additional information or context relevant to this PR}

Reference Issue (For employees only. Ignore if you are an outside contributor)

• Closes https://go/j/[ticket-number]

[github-actions]

📦 SDK Size Impact Report

Measures how much the SDK adds to an app's size (with-SDK minus without-SDK).

Metric	Target Branch	This PR	Change
App Bundle Impact	1.66 MB	1.66 MB	+N/A
Executable Impact	896 bytes	896 bytes	+N/A
XCFramework Size	5.47 MB	5.47 MB	+N/A

➡️ SDK size impact change is minimal.

Raw measurements

Target branch (workstation/9.0-Release):

{"baseline_app_size_kb":84,"baseline_executable_size_bytes":75464,"with_sdk_app_size_kb":1788,"with_sdk_executable_size_bytes":76360,"sdk_impact_kb":1704,"sdk_executable_impact_bytes":896,"xcframework_size_kb":5604}

This PR:

{"baseline_app_size_kb":84,"baseline_executable_size_bytes":75464,"with_sdk_app_size_kb":1788,"with_sdk_executable_size_bytes":76360,"sdk_impact_kb":1704,"sdk_executable_impact_bytes":896,"xcframework_size_kb":5604}

[nickolas-dimitrakas]

LGTM

[BrandonStalnaker]

Looks good in general. Basically we're just relying on the example app builds to detect build issues.

There's a one thing I'd appreciate if we could add.
Somewhere in the README, CONTRIBUTING, etc. should detail how to build and test kits locally. I'm also curious if the matrix.json still needs scheme fields?

[jamesnrokt]

Before approving this I'd need to see how you're replacing the xcframework logic

[denischilik]

Before approving this I'd need to see how you're replacing the xcframework logic

Just to clarify — which part of the xcframework logic are you referring to? Kits have not been distributed as binaries, so I want to make sure I understand what you expect to be replaced.

[nickolas-dimitrakas]

Looks good in general. Basically we're just relying on the example app builds to detect build issues.

There's a one thing I'd appreciate if we could add. Somewhere in the README, CONTRIBUTING, etc. should detail how to build and test kits locally. I'm also curious if the matrix.json still needs scheme fields?

@BrandonStalnaker The way I understood it is that we will be building and testing directly from the Package.swift and the schemes would still be needed.

[denischilik]

Looks good in general. Basically we're just relying on the example app builds to detect build issues.
There's a one thing I'd appreciate if we could add. Somewhere in the README, CONTRIBUTING, etc. should detail how to build and test kits locally. I'm also curious if the matrix.json still needs scheme fields?

@BrandonStalnaker The way I understood it is that we will be building and testing directly from the Package.swift and the schemes would still be needed.

We don't need schemas in matrix.json because we can directly get them from Package.swift of each kit.

[jamesnrokt]

Before approving this I'd need to see how you're replacing the xcframework logic

Just to clarify — which part of the xcframework logic are you referring to? Kits have not been distributed as binaries, so I want to make sure I understand what you expect to be replaced.

In this PR you removed the XCFramework creation from .github/workflows/release-ecosystem-from-main.yml which created binaries to attach to Github releases.

What's the plan to reinstate creation of XCFrameworks for partners that don't want the compilation overhead of SPM or prefer working with XCFrameworks

[deniskocs]

Before approving this I'd need to see how you're replacing the xcframework logic

Just to clarify — which part of the xcframework logic are you referring to? Kits have not been distributed as binaries, so I want to make sure I understand what you expect to be replaced.

In this PR you removed the XCFramework creation from .github/workflows/release-ecosystem-from-main.yml which created binaries to attach to Github releases.

What's the plan to reinstate creation of XCFrameworks for partners that don't want the compilation overhead of SPM or prefer working with XCFrameworks

We are not planning to reinstate XCFramework generation as part of the standard release workflow. This PR removes the Xcode projects and related CI jobs because the team decided not to support distributing kits as .xcframework binaries.

Per the kit simplification design, the default partner-facing distribution for iOS is via SPM and CocoaPods, and XCFramework generation is considered unnecessary for kits. If a partner specifically needs XCFrameworks, we can provide them on request rather than building and attaching them to every GitHub release.

[denischilik]

Decided to close it.