CI failing due to broken file_picker 10.3.9 release

[jakubgiminski]

Describe the bug

The main branch CI is failing on multiple jobs due to file_picker version 10.3.9 accidentally removing the FilePicker.platform static getter.

All 5 failing jobs in run #21382690431:

• dart analyze (3.32.0, ubuntu-latest)
• dart analyze (3.32.0, windows-latest)
• dart analyze latest (3.38.4, ubuntu-latest)
• Serverpod integration tests (flutter)
• Module E2E tests

Error Message
error • The getter 'platform' isn't defined for the type 'FilePicker' • lib/src/image_uploader.dart:21:37 • undefined_getter

To reproduce

Run the CI with file_picker resolved to version 10.3.9

Expected behavior

CI passes on main branch

Library version

all dart versions

Platform information

CI

Additional context

The file_picker package version 10.3.9 introduced an accidental breaking change that removed the FilePicker.platform static property. This was fixed in version 10.3.10.
Reference: file_picker changelog

10.3.10

• Reverted breaking changes accidentally introduced in 10.3.9 to maintain Semantic Versioning compliance.

Affected Files

• modules/legacy/serverpod_auth/serverpod_auth_shared_flutter/lib/src/image_uploader.dart:21
• modules/legacy/serverpod_chat/serverpod_chat_flutter/lib/src/chat_input.dart:202

Fix

Update the file_picker dependency constraint to explicitly exclude the broken version
OR just rerun the pipeline on main branch which may resolve the package to the newer version.

How experienced are you with this library?

Intermediate - Familiar with the basics or have used it in a few projects

Are you interested in working on a PR for this?

• I want to work on this

[marcelomendoncasoares]

Thanks for reporting this, @jakubgiminski! It was an unexpected change on the file_picker package, but they have soon reverted in the next patch release. Then, I think we can safely keep the previous versioning to avoid pushing the lower boundary up without need. I'll close this and the PR as completed, then.

Thanks for the quick fix suggestion anyways! If they haven't reacted that quickly, I would have sure merged your PR to solve the issue on our side :)