UnsupportedOperationException when using Snippet Generator

[guyv]

When using the Jenkins snippet generator for your pipeline job (http://my-jenkins:8080/job/my-pipeline-job/pipeline-syntax/), you can configure the Stash Pull Requests Builder via the option 'properties: Set job properties' and then 'Build Triggers'.
When generating the script it will give you:
"properties([pipelineTriggers([<object of type stashpullrequestbuilder.stashpullrequestbuilder.StashBuildTrigger>])])"

Following stacktrace is found in the log:

java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: no public field credentialsId (or getter method) found in class stashpullrequestbuilder.stashpullrequestbuilder.StashBuildTrigger
at org.jenkinsci.plugins.structs.describable.DescribableParameter.getValue(DescribableParameter.java:161)
at org.jenkinsci.plugins.structs.describable.DescribableParameter.inspect(DescribableParameter.java:142)
at org.jenkinsci.plugins.structs.describable.DescribableModel.uninstantiate2(DescribableModel.java:584)
at org.jenkinsci.plugins.structs.describable.DescribableModel.uninstantiate2_(DescribableModel.java:675)
at org.jenkinsci.plugins.structs.describable.DescribableParameter.uncoerce(DescribableParameter.java:196)
at org.jenkinsci.plugins.structs.describable.DescribableParameter.uncoerce(DescribableParameter.java:190)`

[jakub-bochenski]

Isn't this a duplicate of #69 ?

[guyv]

It is related. I first created a PR to be included in #69 (https://github.com/proski/stash-pullrequest-builder-plugin/pull/1), but the author saw it as a separate issue. @proski
This is not yet fixed in #69

[jakub-bochenski]

OK, so it's blocked by #69

[proski]

It's a completely separate PR. It can be merged without the pipeline support. Pipelines just expose some issues, but we don't need to wait for pipeline support to fix those issues.

I checked it with a freestyle project, the credentials still work, the configuration GUI looks good. I also checked other plugins (simple pull request job, Bitbucket pull request builder, Stash notifier and Git plugin), all of them use getCredentialId, not getcredentialId.

[jakub-bochenski]

OK, but what is the use of improving it while we don't support pipeline. I might be missing something.

Actually shouldn't the changes in #70 prevent snippet generator from displaying this at all?

[proski]

It's just a change to the getter name to conform with the camelCase convention. The conversion is documented:
https://wiki.jenkins.io/display/JENKINS/Basic+guide+to+Jelly+usage+in+Jenkins#BasicguidetoJellyusageinJenkins-Understandingtheitobject

The only pipeline dependency here is the commit description.

When I review code, I prefer small self-contained pull requests rather that a long branch that does everything. But I can add this commit to #70 to allow more meaningful testing of the pipelines.

[jakub-bochenski]

When I review code, I prefer small self-contained pull requests rather that a long branch that does everything.

I also prefer to split the work into as small chunks as are still viable.
I dislike adding functionality that doesn't bring in value yet. In a more sophisticated setup one might use feature toggles, but I think using branches is good enough here.

I think we can apply both of those principles at the same time :)

[proski]

@guyv, it turns out that another getter needs to be renamed. isCancelOutdatedJobsEnabled should be getCancelOutdatedJobsEnabled. Do you want to add that change to this PR?

[guyv]

@proski in a separate commit, I also renamed isIgnoreSsl to getIgnoreSsl

[jakub-bochenski]

@proski there's a bunch of conflicts in StashBuildTrigger now. Can you take a look or do we leave it as is until #69 is merged?

[proski]

I can resolve conflicts, but I don't have permissions to edit this PR. I would have to submit it separately. I can try adding unit tests using Descriptor#getPropertyType. This change doesn't need to wait for pipeline support, it is about following documented rules for descriptor methods.

[guyv]

@proski sure you can't edit? Allow edits from maintainers option is checked.

[jakub-bochenski]

I did some naive resolution, but some methods got moved to other files, so have to fix that

@proski sure you can't edit? Allow edits from maintainers option is checked.

Unfortunately he doesn't have maintainer permissions

[jakub-bochenski]

Closed in favour #112

@guyv thanks for doing the initial work!