Update sdk to version 25 and fix ResourceClassGenerator to not write final fields #757

hameno · 2017-01-12T08:56:40Z

No description provided.

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T08:58:43Z

pom.xml

-    <android.builder.version>1.5.0</android.builder.version>
-    <android.tools.version>24.5.0</android.tools.version>
+    <android.builder.version>2.2.3</android.builder.version>
+    <android.tools.version>25.2.0</android.tools.version>


25.2.3 and if we have too many problems we can try the latest beta.

Sorry this is only on jcenter.....

Sorry this is only on jcenter.....

Argh, hate what has happened to the maven ecosystem lately...

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T09:22:38Z

pom.xml

-    <android.builder.version>1.5.0</android.builder.version>
-    <android.tools.version>24.5.0</android.tools.version>
+    <android.builder.version>2.2.3</android.builder.version>
+    <android.tools.version>25.2.3</android.tools.version>
  </properties>



you need this too:

<repositories> <repository> <snapshots> <enabled>false</enabled> </snapshots> <id>bintray-maven</id> <name>bintray</name> <url>https://dl.bintray.com/android/android-tools</url> </repository> </repositories>

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T09:55:20Z

I'm updating stuff on my branch https://github.com/simpligility/android-maven-plugin/tree/update-sdk-25

You can merge stuff from it to your PR. I will most probably not finish this upgrade as I once tried before and didn't get some stuff.
But this time I'll keep the work in progress in a branch

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T10:42:41Z

Now I remember, last time I couldn't find how to fix that change but you did it :)

final String packageName = VariantConfiguration.getManifestPackage( libManifestFile );
-> final String packageName = new DefaultManifestParser( libManifestFile ).getPackage();

hameno · 2017-01-12T10:45:40Z

Yeah, I found that code in the old version, VariantConfiguration.getManifestPackage basically just called the DefaultManifestParser...

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T10:56:04Z

So in my branch only the emulator test is not working... and the manifest merger 2 needs to be checked
and ofc your final field stuff...

You can merge my stuff in your PR if you want.

UPDATE:

Btw some code is gone from the latest beta ...

import com.android.builder.internal.SymbolLoader;
import com.android.builder.internal.SymbolWriter;

I guess it would be better to target the latest beta

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T11:50:58Z

I've updated my branch with the latest BETA stuff

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T13:41:29Z

SymbolWiter is deprecated https://android.googlesource.com/platform/tools/base/+/master/sdklib/src/main/java/com/android/sdklib/internal/build/SymbolWriter.java

They say to use AndroidBuilder https://android.googlesource.com/platform/tools/build/+/master/builder/src/main/java/com/android/builder/AndroidBuilder.java

And then I found

package com.android.builder.symbols;

import com.android.builder.symbols.SymbolIo;
import com.android.builder.symbols.SymbolTable;
import com.android.utils.Pair;
import com.google.common.base.Preconditions;
import java.io.File;
import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.HashSet;
import java.util.Iterator;
import java.util.function.Consumer;
public class RGeneration {
    private RGeneration() {
    }

    public static void generateRForLibraries(SymbolTable main, Collection<SymbolTable> libraries, File out, boolean finalIds) {
        Preconditions.checkArgument(out.isDirectory(), "!out.iDirectory");
        Pair mainP = Pair.of(main.getTablePackage(), main.getTableName());
        HashMap toWrite = new HashMap();
        Iterator var6 = libraries.iterator();

        while(var6.hasNext()) {
            SymbolTable k = (SymbolTable)var6.next();
            Pair st = Pair.of(k.getTablePackage(), k.getTableName());
            if(!st.equals(mainP)) {
                SymbolTable existing = (SymbolTable)toWrite.get(st);
                if(existing != null) {
                    toWrite.put(st, existing.merge(k));
                } else {
                    toWrite.put(st, k);
                }
            }
        }

        var6 = (new HashSet(toWrite.keySet())).iterator();

        while(var6.hasNext()) {
            Pair k1 = (Pair)var6.next();
            SymbolTable st1 = (SymbolTable)toWrite.get(k1);
            st1 = main.filter(st1).rename(st1.getTablePackage(), st1.getTableName());
            toWrite.put(k1, st1);
        }

        toWrite.values().forEach((st) -> {
            SymbolIo.exportToJava(st, out, finalIds);
        });
    }
}

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T14:55:31Z

I will let you finish this PR and properly test it :p

hameno · 2017-01-12T14:59:55Z

I'll try, any hint on my previous question ("I'm not sure how I can detect if the generation is run during test lifecycle (and inside an aar library).")?

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T16:17:29Z

Maybe @mosabua knows

hameno · 2017-01-12T16:17:55Z

I've made some progress updating it to match AndroidBuilder#processResources, currently testing

hameno · 2017-01-12T16:18:54Z

Is there a IntelliJ codestyle config anywhere? Checkstyle kills me here...

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T16:20:46Z

haha I also hate the codestyle :p @mosabua Do we have an intellij formatter?

hameno · 2017-01-12T16:33:34Z

Huh, so now it only generates the main R file (but includes all symbols from libs), not yet sure how to fix that using the new classes.

hameno · 2017-01-12T16:47:34Z

I think that's it, my (rather complex 20-modules) project is now building successfully and all tests are working, even with robolectric 3.2.1.
Now I need to verify, if all (manifests etc) is correct :)

Also: I still need to check an actual apk build (my project only consists of aar libraries). I think there is still one bug: no final (which is required for apks)

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T16:57:00Z

Do you use manifest merger? Cuz I quickly did that upgrade and wasn't too sure about that. I didn't take the time to look deeper. It needs to be tested at least with one merge

…

On Thu, 12 Jan 2017, 17:47 Philip Schiffer, ***@***.***> wrote: I think that's it, my (rather complex 20-modules) project is now building successfully and all tests are working, even with robolectric 3.2.1. Now I need to verify, if all (manifests etc) is correct :) Also: I still need to check an actual apk build (my project only consists of aar libraries) — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#757 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABrbC6ToRbCbpQzcOstHsXQjEOuK4LKYks5rRlkogaJpZM4LhgPy> .

hameno · 2017-01-12T16:59:28Z

Yes, it's used heavily in this project. It's on my to-do list for apk build test. Gonna compare old and new APK using Android studio.

Shusshu · 2017-01-12T18:13:30Z

Oh and manifest merger v1 is gone. Some class are gone from android builder... Maybe we can bring them back in the project if we still want to support it

…

On Thu, 12 Jan 2017, 17:59 Philip Schiffer, ***@***.***> wrote: Yes, it's used heavily in this project. It's on my to-do list for apk build test. Gonna compare old and new APK using Android studio. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#757 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABrbC82n7hqO74JMzG3ruJJ6f40axlYFks5rRlvxgaJpZM4LhgPy> .

hameno · 2017-01-12T18:57:32Z

APK looks good, will cleanup this branch and try to match the codestyle and then it should be done

hameno · 2017-02-11T11:43:38Z

@Shusshu Done

william-ferguson-au · 2017-02-12T00:49:12Z

I have never used the emulator mojo either.
Would love to get some metrics over which mojos are used and how much.

Shusshu · 2017-02-25T21:41:31Z

@hameno you can use rc1 now

<android.builder.version>2.3.0-rc1</android.builder.version>
<android.tools.version>25.3.0-rc1</android.tools.version>

Shusshu · 2017-03-03T12:38:00Z

You can update it again ;) it's released 2.3.0 and then somebody should test & merge this

hameno · 2017-03-18T08:51:35Z

I got every test except AbstractEmulatorMojoTest to pass.

AbstractEmulatorMojoTest fails due to an ExceptionInInitializerError because AndroidSdkHandler cannot init the SchemaModule fields (ADDON_MODULE, REPOSITORY_MODULE, SYS_IMG_MODULE, COMMON_MODULE). I tracked it down to SchemaModule:156 which tries to get a namespace for a XML annotation. I'm not sure why this fails as the LinkedList contains the annotation but with a different hash?! Maybe PowerMock is the reason? Should we just disable the test?

Shusshu · 2017-03-18T11:10:19Z

I don't mind if we disable it... wdyt @simpligility/android-maven-plugins-core-committers ?

mosabua · 2017-03-18T19:58:13Z

If we disable support for the emulator mojos we completely loose the ability to run automated integration tests. That sucks imho. I am however not aware of the plans from the SDK team on how to support emulator interaction going forward (or even the current status).

mosabua · 2017-03-18T20:16:34Z

But yes.. maybe we can disable the test for now or at least the failing method and try to replace it. That whole mocking is a PITA anyway. If the mojo works in an integration test maybe that test can completely disappear and we dont worry about it.

Shusshu · 2017-03-22T14:07:09Z

@hameno can you add a @ignore for the emulator test?

@simpligility/android-maven-plugins-core-committers I have been testing the emulator-start command and it actually doesn't work even in previous versions

The script it creates can be executed manually but the CommandExecutor cannot run it. I couldn't find why.

So let's merge this in with @ignore on the emulator test

hameno · 2017-03-22T14:11:00Z

Okay, gonna do this later today.

@Shusshu Maybe the script does not have execute permissions?

Shusshu · 2017-03-22T15:23:21Z

I was able to run it via the cmd line

mosabua · 2017-03-22T16:34:00Z

It sucks that the plugin needs the bintray repo. That basically means it wont work out of the box for normal Maven users and we need to update the docs. But I think we should merge this now and iterate in master..

Shusshu · 2017-03-22T16:36:46Z

Why would it not work for normal users? It's just a repo... But anyway that was to access the android builder beta version now we use the stable one so it should work without it

…

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, 17:34 Manfred Moser, ***@***.***> wrote: It sucks that the plugin needs the bintray repo. That basically means it wont work out of the box for normal Maven users and we need to update the docs. But I think we should merge this now and iterate in master.. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#757 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABrbC2XVaGcQEXqH5w_42OqLGg7Q3CUIks5roU15gaJpZM4LhgPy> .

mosabua · 2017-03-22T16:38:48Z

Great ... you wanna merge this now then?

mosabua · 2017-03-22T16:39:19Z

I am working atm but hopefully can give this a whirl tonight.. just got back last night..

Shusshu · 2017-03-22T16:40:42Z

Ok cool. Just need to wait the last ignore change or you can do it later when you try it out

…

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, 17:38 Manfred Moser, ***@***.***> wrote: Great ... you wanna merge this now then? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#757 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABrbC83m1L6KyWVIGk25Uiyh3KnyLELGks5roU6agaJpZM4LhgPy> .

mosabua · 2017-03-22T16:46:56Z

Sounds good. Will probably do a release associated to that .. have you tried the site build? With the change to JDK 8 it probably fails all over the place..

Shusshu · 2017-03-22T17:18:57Z

Nope haven't tried

…

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, 17:46 Manfred Moser, ***@***.***> wrote: Sounds good. Will probably do a release associated to that .. have you tried the site build? With the change to JDK 8 it probably fails all over the place.. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#757 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABrbC8MLSnLoWYQOhUEEOCAYW8Ud4IjRks5roVCBgaJpZM4LhgPy> .

hameno · 2017-03-22T17:24:04Z

I've disabled the test

mosabua · 2017-03-22T18:46:47Z

Btw I updated the changedlog and remove the bintray repo. All good so far.. more tonight. Will up version to 4.5.0 for release

hameno mentioned this pull request Jan 12, 2017

ResourceClassGenerator always generates final fields #756

Closed

Shusshu reviewed Jan 12, 2017

View reviewed changes

Add jcenter repo + update sdk version

2664058

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch from ea3d281 to f0c1b54 Compare January 12, 2017 09:08

Shusshu reviewed Jan 12, 2017

View reviewed changes

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch from f0c1b54 to edcde06 Compare January 12, 2017 09:26

Work in progress Update AndroidSdk

b7c2bb4

Work in progress: ManifestMerger

e4dc035

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch from edcde06 to 1de7a15 Compare January 12, 2017 16:04

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch from 1de7a15 to 1b9782f Compare January 12, 2017 16:20

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch from 1b9782f to 3351d01 Compare January 12, 2017 16:23

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch from 3351d01 to 493a6e2 Compare January 12, 2017 16:41

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch from 7e1760f to fbabee0 Compare March 6, 2017 09:26

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch 4 times, most recently from f572a33 to 3ebe946 Compare March 18, 2017 08:27

Update to 25.3.0

905d51b

hameno force-pushed the final_ids branch from 3ebe946 to 905d51b Compare March 18, 2017 08:35

Disable AbstractEmulatorMojoTest

f4fc624

mosabua merged commit e906101 into simpligility:master Mar 22, 2017

hameno deleted the final_ids branch March 22, 2017 17:30

Update sdk to version 25 and fix ResourceClassGenerator to not write final fields #757

Update sdk to version 25 and fix ResourceClassGenerator to not write final fields #757

Conversation

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017

Shusshu Jan 12, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hameno Jan 12, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Shusshu Jan 12, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017 • edited Loading

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017 • edited Loading

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017 • edited Loading

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017 • edited Loading

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017 • edited Loading

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017 via email

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017 via email

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017

hameno commented Feb 11, 2017

william-ferguson-au commented Feb 12, 2017

Shusshu commented Feb 25, 2017

Shusshu commented Mar 3, 2017

hameno commented Mar 18, 2017

Shusshu commented Mar 18, 2017

mosabua commented Mar 18, 2017

mosabua commented Mar 18, 2017

Shusshu commented Mar 22, 2017

hameno commented Mar 22, 2017

Shusshu commented Mar 22, 2017

mosabua commented Mar 22, 2017

Shusshu commented Mar 22, 2017 via email

mosabua commented Mar 22, 2017

mosabua commented Mar 22, 2017

Shusshu commented Mar 22, 2017 via email

mosabua commented Mar 22, 2017

Shusshu commented Mar 22, 2017 via email

hameno commented Mar 22, 2017 • edited Loading

mosabua commented Mar 22, 2017

Shusshu Jan 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

hameno Jan 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Shusshu Jan 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Shusshu commented Jan 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

hameno commented Jan 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

hameno commented Mar 22, 2017 •

edited

Loading