SonarQube 8.9 LTS #213
Comments
|
Hi @jlentink, thanks for reporting this. Is this the full stack trace? It looks like an issue with runtime dependencies but it's not something I've seen before.
Regards, |
|
Hi @toniedzwiedz, Unfortunately, I cannot share the code. But here is the full error |
|
Did a run with -X for even more detail: |
|
Disabling AEM-11 is a good workaround for this issue. |
|
I have the same issue. @jlentink thanks for the workaround! |
|
same problem here, after upgrading from SonarQube 7.x to 8.9.0. I am using the sonar-scanner-cli, so no Maven involved. it happens with every java project. what I did: here is my stack-trace (similar to the one above): I had a custom plugin developed by myself with exactly the same problem. I upgraded sonar-plugin-api to 8.9.0.43852 and sonar-java-plugin to 6.15.1.26025, did a rebuild of my plugin and it worked. since I only need my plugin to work in 8.9.0 I did not look into compatibility stuff, so I did not check in which version of sonar-java-plugin the API change was done and which sonar-plugin-api version is compatible with that. I simply went with the versions that are used in 8.9.0 LTS. |
|
Hello, |
|
Hello, we had the same issue |
|
Same issue here too. |
|
Same issue. @toniedzwiedz any plans to create a new release compatible with the latest versions of SonarQube? |
|
Same issue here as well. Any plans of releasing a new version of AEM rules plugin to fix this? |
|
We've just upgraded to SonarQube 8.9.4 (the most recent LTS version) and came across the same problem. |
|
Hope pull request #216 will solve the issue |
|
Any updates about this issue? |
|
Found an issue in Sonar Jira https://jira.sonarsource.com/browse/SONARJAVA-3793 |
|
Is this project still active? |
|
Hi @ashokmca07 , it's not actively developed, more of a maintenance mode. Thanks for the pull request. I'll test the changes and get a version released by the end of the week. |
|
@ashokmca07 the tests pass locally for me, but I'll need to check this against a couple versions of the JDK and SonarQube. This was originally automated via TravicCI but there have been changes in how Travis operates so I'll need to get each PR to trigger a CI build first. I think I can quickly migrate to GitHub actions but that's something I'll have to pick up next week. Apologies for the further delay. |
@toniedzwiedz thanks for your support |
|
@ashokmca07 I'm testing out a few more scenarios, analysing a couple of real project. I noticed that you used version 7.6 of the Java plugin https://github.com/wttech/AEM-Rules-for-SonarQube/pull/218/files#diff-9c5fb3d1b7e3b0f54bc5c4182965c4fe1f9023d449017cece3005d3f90e8e4d8R109 and I may have jumped the gun mirroring this in the requirements https://github.com/wttech/AEM-Rules-for-SonarQube/pull/221/files Now I'm getting an error on startup The Docker image for SonarQube 8.9 comes with version 6.15, which is where this change was made https://jira.sonarsource.com/browse/SONARJAVA-3793 I think it's fine to compile against a newer verison, but I'll leave 6.15 as a requirement. Surprisingly, the CI script that I introduced didn't pick this up. I was hoping to reuse the same method the SonarQube team is using in their tests https://github.com/SonarSource/docker-sonarqube/blob/master/run-tests.sh#L58 but it seems the http://localhost:9000/api/plugins/available |
|
a while ago I fell into the same trap in one of my custom plugins. back then I discovered that a sonarQubeMinVersion of 8.9 enforces sonar-java 7.6 |
|
@youngroman it's odd, because I'm using the Docker image for SonarQube Community 8.9 ( It could be possible to support 8.4 and higher. For now, I'll try a combination of java:6.15 and SonarQube 8.9 LTS and see how the improved tests pass. |
|
Exactly local/CI tests are always green. let me also take a look at the combination of java:6.15 and SonarQube 8.9 LTS |
|
@ashokmca07 they no longer are after the recent improvement https://github.com/wttech/AEM-Rules-for-SonarQube/runs/5855142958?check_suite_focus=true Mind you, that test only gives us assurance that there aren't serious dependency conflicts that would prevent the server from starting up (which is something we've seen with SonarQube 7.9 in the past). To test the original issue this thread is actually about, we need to perform an analysis at runtime, with a quality profile that has For now, none of the automated tests covers this scenario (unit tests just use the java plugin version declared in the Automation of actual analysis at runtime should be possible but it's not a scenario I can quickly cover. |
|
#224 has a version that passes the improved tests, i.e. we know that AEM Rules have been installed. I'll test this version manually, if |
|
AEM-11 appears to work with the version from #224, I'll perform a release today and raise a PR to get it into the SonarQube marketplace |
|
Release 1.6, compatible with SonarQube 8.9 LTS has been made available in the SonarQube marketplace. For sources and binary downloads, check https://github.com/wttech/AEM-Rules-for-SonarQube/releases/tag/v1.6 Many thanks to @ashokmca07 for the contribution and apologies for the long wait. |
|
@toniedzwiedz Thanks a lot for your help and quick releases to SonarQube marketplace |
|
Thanks @ashokmca07 and @toniedzwiedz for resolving this long pending issue and releasing a newer version, much appreciated! |
SonarQube 8.9LTS and AEM rules 1.3 are triggering an error when performing a sonarQube maven scan.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: