Re: build-pipeline: javax.annotation.processing.FilerException: Attempt to reopen a file for path BuildPipelineView.stapler

2013-05-07 Thread Marco Miller
Hi! I happened to fix that problem -alongside another contrib; please refer to this for some more details (and feel free to ask if anything): - https://github.com/jenkinsci/build-pipeline-plugin/pull/1 On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:10:43 AM UTC-4, nicolas de loof wrote: I can't run mvn hpi:run or

build-pipeline: javax.annotation.processing.FilerException: Attempt to reopen a file for path BuildPipelineView.stapler

2013-05-03 Thread nicolas de loof
I can't run mvn hpi:run or other build commands on build-pipeline-plugin. the error routed me to https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-11739, but didn't helped any thought ? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Jenkins Developers group. To

Re: build-pipeline: javax.annotation.processing.FilerException: Attempt to reopen a file for path BuildPipelineView.stapler

2013-05-03 Thread Mads Nielsen
I think it is caused by a duplicate DataBound constructor somewhere in the plugin, a colleague of mine had the exact same issue when he was building it. He removed the oldest of the databound constructors and it worked. Can't remember sepecifics :) On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:10 PM, nicolas de loof

Re: build-pipeline: javax.annotation.processing.FilerException: Attempt to reopen a file for path BuildPipelineView.stapler

2013-05-03 Thread nicolas de loof
This duplicated DataBoundConstructor was introduced a year ago - https://github.com/jenkinsci/build-pipeline-plugin/commit/6c153646fd89387b7c199342a04b3b013d01ca00, so I don't think it's the root cause for this error - even I didn't know you can have multiple DataBoundConstructors ... So I guess

Re: build-pipeline: javax.annotation.processing.FilerException: Attempt to reopen a file for path BuildPipelineView.stapler

2013-05-03 Thread Jesse Glick
On 05/03/2013 10:08 AM, nicolas de loof wrote: I didn't know you can have multiple DataBoundConstructors Because you cannot, so the build is correctly failing. Not sure how this change could ever have been built; perhaps by a nonstandard environment like Eclipse? Commenting out the first and