This pull request is created by [automatic cherry pick workflow](https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/releases/Flutter-Cherrypick-Process.md#automatically-creates-a-cherry-pick-request)
Please fill in the form below, and a flutter domain expert will evaluate this cherry pick request.
### Issue Link:
What is the link to the issue this cherry-pick is addressing?
There was no associated issue, but the problem is that https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/166727 broke Flutter Android builds on apps that use plugins with AGP versions less than 8.2.
### Changelog Description:
Explain this cherry pick in one line that is accessible to most Flutter developers. See [best practices](https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/releases/Hotfix-Documentation-Best-Practices.md) for examples
Fixes Flutter Android builds for apps which use plugins with old Android Gradle Plugin versions.
### Impact Description:
What is the impact (ex. visual jank on Samsung phones, app crash, cannot ship an iOS app)? Does it impact development (ex. flutter doctor crashes when Android Studio is installed), or the shipping production app (the app crashes on launch)
The impact is a crash in the build process.
### Workaround:
Is there a workaround for this issue?
No
### Risk:
What is the risk level of this cherry-pick?
### Test Coverage:
Are you confident that your fix is well-tested by automated tests?
### Validation Steps:
What are the steps to validate that this fix works?
Build an app that uses AGP < 8.2.
This reverts commit
8dccbc33df.
Find/replace didn't catch the use of `jvmTarget = "1.8"` in
`dev/integration_tests/android_engine_test/android/app/build.gradle` and
`android_engine_test` needed to have `"com.android.application"`
updated.
Should resolve issues related to the following messages being output on
stderr:
```
warning: [options] source value 8 is obsolete and will be removed in a future release"
warning: [options] target value 8 is obsolete and will be removed in a future release
warning: [options] To suppress warnings about obsolete options, use -Xlint:-options.
```
Fixes https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/165973
<!-- start_original_pr_link -->
Reverts: flutter/flutter#165749
<!-- end_original_pr_link -->
<!-- start_initiating_author -->
Initiated by: matanlurey
<!-- end_initiating_author -->
<!-- start_revert_reason -->
Reason for reverting: Still passing command-line arguments from recipes
that have no effect but cause the runner to crash.
<!-- end_revert_reason -->
<!-- start_original_pr_author -->
Original PR Author: matanlurey
<!-- end_original_pr_author -->
<!-- start_reviewers -->
Reviewed By: {jtmcdole}
<!-- end_reviewers -->
<!-- start_revert_body -->
This change reverts the following previous change:
Partial re-land of https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/165628:
- Fixes the mistake that the `Cocoon` class did things that well, were
not specific to Cocoon.
- Renamed to `MetricsResultWriter`, as that is all it does now.
---
Closes https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/165618.
The `devicelab/bin/test_runner.dart upload-metrics` command use to have
_two_ responsibilities:
- Well, upload test **metrics** (benchmarks) to Skia Perf (it still does
that)
- Upload test **status** to Cocoon (it did until
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/165614)
As https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/165614 proved, this API
predated the current LUCI setup, where Cocoon itself receives task
status updates from LUCI, and it turns out this entire time, DeviceLab
was making (at best) NOP calls, and at worst, causing crashes and
corrupt data (https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/165610).
<!-- end_revert_body -->
Co-authored-by: auto-submit[bot] <flutter-engprod-team@google.com>
The cost of bootstapping the initial PSOs can regress cold startup time
for customer money. As an experiment, attempt to defer PSO construction
to skia like.
---------
Co-authored-by: Aaron Clarke <aaclarke@google.com>
Co-authored-by: gaaclarke <30870216+gaaclarke@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- start_original_pr_link -->
Reverts: flutter/flutter#165628
<!-- end_original_pr_link -->
<!-- start_initiating_author -->
Initiated by: jtmcdole
<!-- end_initiating_author -->
<!-- start_revert_reason -->
Reason for reverting: breaking tree:
https://ci.chromium.org/ui/p/flutter/builders/prod/Linux_mokey%20backdrop_filter_perf__e2e_summary/3833/overview
<!-- end_revert_reason -->
<!-- start_original_pr_author -->
Original PR Author: matanlurey
<!-- end_original_pr_author -->
<!-- start_reviewers -->
Reviewed By: {jtmcdole, yjbanov}
<!-- end_reviewers -->
<!-- start_revert_body -->
This change reverts the following previous change:
🚫 **Do not merge** until
https://flutter-review.googlesource.com/c/recipes/+/64220/1 is merged.
---
Closes https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/165618.
The `devicelab/bin/test_runner.dart upload-metrics` command use to have
_two_ responsibilities:
- Well, upload test **metrics** (benchmarks) to Skia Perf (it still does
that)
- Upload test **status** to Cocoon (it did until
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/165614)
As https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/165614 proved, this API
predated the current LUCI setup, where Cocoon itself receives task
status updates from LUCI, and it turns out this entire time, DeviceLab
was making (at best) NOP calls, and at worst, causing crashes and
corrupt data (https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/165610).
In other words, this is removing entirely dead/unused code (though the
recipes have to be updated first).
/cc @jason-simmons as I need Jason's help reviewing the recipes change
and want to provide context.
<!-- end_revert_body -->
Co-authored-by: auto-submit[bot] <flutter-engprod-team@google.com>
<!-- start_original_pr_link -->
Reverts: flutter/flutter#165261
<!-- end_original_pr_link -->
<!-- start_initiating_author -->
Initiated by: jonahwilliams
<!-- end_initiating_author -->
<!-- start_revert_reason -->
Reason for reverting: bork the tree
<!-- end_revert_reason -->
<!-- start_original_pr_author -->
Original PR Author: jonahwilliams
<!-- end_original_pr_author -->
<!-- start_reviewers -->
Reviewed By: {gaaclarke}
<!-- end_reviewers -->
<!-- start_revert_body -->
This change reverts the following previous change:
The cost of bootstapping the initial PSOs can regress cold startup time
for customer money. As an experiment, attempt to defer PSO construction
to skia like.
<!-- end_revert_body -->
Co-authored-by: auto-submit[bot] <flutter-engprod-team@google.com>
The cost of bootstapping the initial PSOs can regress cold startup time
for customer money. As an experiment, attempt to defer PSO construction
to skia like.
---------
Co-authored-by: Aaron Clarke <aaclarke@google.com>
Co-authored-by: gaaclarke <30870216+gaaclarke@users.noreply.github.com>
Fixes#163750
Adds local.properties in any directory to the repo wide gitignore.
Test changes to make the test easier to debug, specifically identifying
the difference between a debug and release failure.
## Pre-launch Checklist
- [x] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined
there for submitting PRs.
- [x] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my
responsibilities.
- [x] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide], including [Features
we expect every widget to implement].
- [x] I signed the [CLA].
- [x] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description
above.
- [x] I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with `///`).
- [x] I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is
[test-exempt].
- [x] I followed the [breaking change policy] and added [Data Driven
Fixes] where supported.
- [x] All existing and new tests are passing.
- **update pure_android_host_apps/android_custom_host_app to
compileSdk/targetSdk 35, newest stable agp and gradle versions, update
source compatibility to java 17, updated dependencies**
- **Update documentation and migrate compileSdkVersion to compileSdk**
- **Update gitignore to ignore specific module folder name and
local.properties repo wide**
Related to #149836
## Pre-launch Checklist
- [x] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined
there for submitting PRs.
- [x] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my
responsibilities.
- [x] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide], including [Features
we expect every widget to implement].
- [x] I signed the [CLA].
- [x] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description
above.
- [x] I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with `///`).
- [x] I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is
[test-exempt].
- [x] I followed the [breaking change policy] and added [Data Driven
Fixes] where supported.
- [x] All existing and new tests are passing.
[Discord]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Chat.md
[Data Driven Fixes]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Data-driven-Fixes.md
This benchmark is a benchmark of the integration test binding which IMO
is not that important given that we continue to rely on flutter_driver
for actual performance metrics.
Fixes https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/162615
Can test 2 different ways.
On a mac (or linux machine) with adb on the path (or android sdk set in
ANDROID_HOME) and an emulator running (or physical device attached) that
is api 30 or higher.
```
cd dev/devicelab
dart bin/test_runner.dart test -t android_display_cutout
```
OR
```
dev/integration_tests/display_cutout_rotation
flutter drive integration_test/display_cutout_test.dart
```
Proof the test ran successfully
```
[2025-02-12 08:08:22.069817] [STDOUT] Removing Synthetic notch...
[2025-02-12 08:08:22.071147] [STDOUT] Executing "/b/s/w/ir/cache/android/sdk/platform-tools/adb -s emulator-5554 shell cmd overlay disable com.android.internal.display.cutout.emulation.tall" in "/b/s/w/ir/x/w/rc/tmpk3k3yhhp/flutter sdk/dev/integration_tests/display_cutout_rotation/" with environment {BOT: true, LANG: en_US.UTF-8}
[2025-02-12 08:08:22.862219] [STDOUT] Checking for reboot
[android_defines_test] Process terminated with exit code 0.
Task result:
{
"success": true,
"data": null,
"detailFiles": [],
"benchmarkScoreKeys": [],
"reason": "success"
}
```
https://logs.chromium.org/logs/flutter/buildbucket/cr-buildbucket/8723125792202374961/+/u/run_android_defines_test/stdout
All checks passed
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/162641/checks?check_run_id=36991537539
## Pre-launch Checklist
- [x] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined
there for submitting PRs.
- [x] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my
responsibilities.
- [x] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide], including [Features
we expect every widget to implement].
- [x] I signed the [CLA].
- [x] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description
above.
- [x] I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with `///`).
- [x] I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is
[test-exempt].
- [x] I followed the [breaking change policy] and added [Data Driven
Fixes] where supported.
- [x] All existing and new tests are passing.
Closes https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/162704.
/cc @loic-sharma.
I expect I'll have to update some iOS/macOS unit and possibly
integration tests due to this change, but wanted something concrete to
talk about during our 1:1. Feel free to leave comments or questions even
if this PR is in "draft".
Re-lands https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/162644.
Reverts 7569fbfce500f3859902984144855cb249de24ed, with the change to
`ios_app_with_extensions_test.dart` omitted, which is intentional
(`--verbose` is load-bearing and used to check for a particular
message).
Fixes https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/160242
## Pre-launch Checklist
- [x] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined
there for submitting PRs.
- [x] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my
responsibilities.
- [x] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide], including [Features
we expect every widget to implement].
- [x] I signed the [CLA].
- [x] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description
above.
- [x] I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with `///`).
- [x] I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is
[test-exempt].
- [x] I followed the [breaking change policy] and added [Data Driven
Fixes] where supported.
- [x] All existing and new tests are passing.
If you need help, consider asking for advice on the #hackers-new channel
on [Discord].
Another large test suite that has never been running.
The underlying thing I _think_ it wanted tested, which was hybrid
composition, is now tested by `android_engine_test`. I also added a red
square on top of each platform view so that, like
`hybrid_android_views`, we can make sure layering is working as
expected.
Any other ideas? Can also be follow-up PRs?
Someone could always resurrect it via `git`-magic (or GitHub), but let's
not maintain (including Gradle lock files, Dart analysis, etc) unused
code that hasn't run in 12+ months.
/cc @johnmccutchan
<!-- start_original_pr_link -->
Reverts: flutter/flutter#162644
<!-- end_original_pr_link -->
<!-- start_initiating_author -->
Initiated by: matanlurey
<!-- end_initiating_author -->
<!-- start_revert_reason -->
Reason for reverting: At least one post-submit test depends on the
output of `--verbose`.
<!-- end_revert_reason -->
<!-- start_original_pr_author -->
Original PR Author: matanlurey
<!-- end_original_pr_author -->
<!-- start_reviewers -->
Reviewed By: {cbracken, reidbaker, jonahwilliams}
<!-- end_reviewers -->
<!-- start_revert_body -->
This change reverts the following previous change:
These can be useful, but were probably left in past the point where they
are always useful:
- https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/58018
- https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/56342
- https://github.com/flutter/flutter/pull/74080
... compared to the cost of reading these logs with 1000s of lines of
`stdout: ` output.
Will ask the CI gods if any of this was load-bearing before sending out
for review.
<!-- end_revert_body -->
Co-authored-by: auto-submit[bot] <flutter-engprod-team@google.com>
Powered by the new and amazing `unnecessary_ignore` lint.
We're not enabling this lint by default because being able to
temporarily use ignores that don't ignore anything is a powerful tool to
enable migrations. We should turn this lint on locally periodically,
though, and clean up all outdated ignores.
As per https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/162620, we are going to
run the web benchmarks at `-O2` for a trial period to evaluate the
performance difference, which will give us some data on whether we can
consider changing to `-O2` by default.
