⚙️ Flip org.jetbrains.android to optional

[AlexV525]

Tip

To try out the plugin on other IDEs, head over to https://github.com/AlexV525/flutter-intellij/releases and download the latest release!

Resolves #6809
Resolves #7205
Resolves #7947

Tested with PyCharm 2024.3.2

Pre-launch Checklist

• I read the Contributor Guide and followed the process outlined there for submitting PRs.
• I read the Tree Hygiene wiki page, which explains my responsibilities.
• I read the Flutter Style Guide recently, and have followed its advice.
• I signed the CLA.
• I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above.
• I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with ///).
• I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is test-exempt.
• All existing and new tests are passing.

[CaiJingLong]

WebStorm ready.

[xkeyC]

👍 That's a great update, which allows us to use JetBrains Community Edition IDEs for coding, as not everyone needs Android support (they can try Android Studio for that).

[AlexV525]

There seem to be exceptions when running on IntelliJ IDEA Ultimate. Not sure if it's related. Marking as draft for further investigations.

2025-03-07 00:25:59,609 [  74946]   INFO - #c.i.p.s.VulnerableApiService - Error on parsing libraries, retry
2025-03-07 00:26:09,624 [  84961]   INFO - #c.i.p.s.VulnerableApiService - Error on parsing libraries, retry
2025-03-07 00:26:09,624 [  84961]   WARN - #c.i.p.s.VulnerableApiService - retry failed
java.lang.Throwable: Control-flow exceptions (e.g. this class com.intellij.openapi.application.ReadAction$CannotReadException) should never be logged. Instead, these should have been rethrown if caught.
	at com.intellij.openapi.diagnostic.Logger.ensureNotControlFlow(Logger.java:493)
	at com.intellij.idea.IdeaLogger.warn(IdeaLogger.java:139)
	at com.intellij.packageChecker.service.VulnerableApiService$createLibrariesFqnVulnerabilitiesFlow$3.invokeSuspend(VulnerableApiService.kt:141)
	at com.intellij.packageChecker.service.VulnerableApiService$createLibrariesFqnVulnerabilitiesFlow$3.invoke(VulnerableApiService.kt)
	at com.intellij.packageChecker.service.VulnerableApiService$createLibrariesFqnVulnerabilitiesFlow$3.invoke(VulnerableApiService.kt)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.flow.FlowKt__ErrorsKt$catch$$inlined$unsafeFlow$1.collect(SafeCollector.common.kt:113)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.flow.FlowKt__ErrorsKt$catch$$inlined$unsafeFlow$1$1.invokeSuspend(SafeCollector.common.kt)
	at kotlin.coroutines.jvm.internal.BaseContinuationImpl.resumeWith(ContinuationImpl.kt:33)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.DispatchedTask.run(DispatchedTask.kt:102)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.scheduling.CoroutineScheduler.runSafely(CoroutineScheduler.kt:608)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.scheduling.CoroutineScheduler$Worker.executeTask(CoroutineScheduler.kt:873)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.scheduling.CoroutineScheduler$Worker.runWorker(CoroutineScheduler.kt:763)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.scheduling.CoroutineScheduler$Worker.run(CoroutineScheduler.kt:750)
Caused by: com.intellij.openapi.application.ReadAction$CannotReadException
	at com.intellij.openapi.application.ReadAction$CannotReadException.lambda$jobCancellation$0(ReadAction.java:128)
	at com.intellij.openapi.progress.util.ProgressIndicatorUtilService.runActionAndCancelBeforeWrite(ProgressIndicatorUtilService.java:55)
	at com.intellij.openapi.progress.util.ProgressIndicatorUtils.runActionAndCancelBeforeWrite(ProgressIndicatorUtils.java:157)
	at com.intellij.openapi.application.rw.CancellableReadActionKt.cancellableReadActionInternal(cancellableReadAction.kt:28)
	at com.intellij.openapi.application.rw.CancellableReadActionKt.cancellableReadAction$lambda$0(cancellableReadAction.kt:17)
	at com.intellij.openapi.progress.ContextKt.prepareThreadContext(context.kt:85)
	at com.intellij.openapi.application.rw.CancellableReadActionKt.cancellableReadAction(cancellableReadAction.kt:16)
	at com.intellij.openapi.application.rw.PlatformReadWriteActionSupport.computeCancellable(PlatformReadWriteActionSupport.kt:42)
	at com.intellij.openapi.application.ReadAction.computeCancellable(ReadAction.java:115)
	at com.intellij.packageChecker.service.VulnerableApiService$createLibrariesFqnVulnerabilitiesFlow$1.invokeSuspend(VulnerableApiService.kt:124)
	at com.intellij.packageChecker.service.VulnerableApiService$createLibrariesFqnVulnerabilitiesFlow$1.invoke(VulnerableApiService.kt)
	at com.intellij.packageChecker.service.VulnerableApiService$createLibrariesFqnVulnerabilitiesFlow$1.invoke(VulnerableApiService.kt)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.flow.FlowKt__ZipKt$combine$1$1.invokeSuspend(Zip.kt:29)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.flow.FlowKt__ZipKt$combine$1$1.invoke(Zip.kt)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.flow.FlowKt__ZipKt$combine$1$1.invoke(Zip.kt)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.flow.internal.CombineKt$combineInternal$2.invokeSuspend(Combine.kt:73)
	at kotlin.coroutines.jvm.internal.BaseContinuationImpl.resumeWith(ContinuationImpl.kt:33)
	at kotlinx.coroutines.DispatchedTask.run(DispatchedTask.kt:104)
	... 4 more

[AlexV525]

Turns out the built artifacts on Windows will fail with specific projects but not related.

[AlexV525]

@jwren

[pq]

This is cool. Since it raises a kind of product question I'll have to defer to folks with more context.

Specifically: are we signing on to support these additional IDEs?

/fyi @anderdobo

[jwren]

What @pq said.

There have been a number of P0 issues that have prevented us from doing anything with the Flutter IJ plugin for bit, but with the release out yesterday, and hopefully a quick resolve on some of the bugs introduced, see the M85.1 milestone, we are happy to take a look at PRs. More time can be spent on issues that are in current milestones. For this PR, what @pq said is right, this is a product question. There are strong arguments on both sides with regard to if the Flutter IJ plugin should increase it's surface area to support more than Android Studio / Community / Ultimate.

[AlexV525]

For everyone who wants to try the plugin on other IDEs, I've setup the release workflow with my fork, and you can download the plugin through GitHub Release: https://github.com/AlexV525/flutter-intellij/releases

[helin24]

I've been looking over IJ documentation to make sure I understand how extensions work and the consequences of having this dependency.

One thing that I want to clarify - it seems our current setup with only <depends>org.jetbrains.android</depends> is wrong if we aren't also including config-file="idea-contribs.xml", right? If a user does have org.jetbrains.android they will still be missing the things in the config file. Unless the contents of the config file are only needed for Android Studio and not for situations where a user is using IntelliJ with the android plugin?

[helin24]

@AlexV525 I talked to Jaime today about this change. Does org.jetbrains.android and com.intellij.modules.androidstudio contain the same classes? In which case could we include studio-contribs.xml when either are available?

[AlexV525]

@helin24 Thanks for digging in!

Does org.jetbrains.android and com.intellij.modules.androidstudio contain the same classes?

They seem similar, but com.intellij.modules.androidstudio has more content than org.jetbrains.android.

In which case could we include studio-contribs.xml when either are available?

If I understand you correctly, we might also put the following declaration:

<depends optional="true" config-file="studio-contribs.xml">com.intellij.modules.androidstudio</depends>

Correct?

[helin24]

We already have:

<depends optional="true" config-file="studio-contribs.xml">com.intellij.modules.androidstudio</depends>

But I was wondering if we could add:

<depends optional="true" config-file="studio-contribs.xml">org.jetbrains.android</depends>

instead of using a new config file android-contribs.xml.

However, if the contents of the android studio module and the android plugin are different, then we're risking some files missing or versioning issues. Unless the functionality we're using from the android studio module is so basic that it's likely to be available in both? Having not looked into the details, I have no idea.

It seems odd to me that we would check for org.jetbrains.android as a dependency but then add no additional functionality as a result though.

@AlexV525

[AlexV525]

@helin24

But I was wondering if we could add:

<depends optional="true" config-file="studio-contribs.xml">org.jetbrains.android</depends>

instead of using a new config file android-contribs.xml.

It seems odd to me that we would check for org.jetbrains.android as a dependency but then add no additional functionality as a result though.

I guess ~.android stands its place because platform plugins are no longer bundled with editors (there is a standalone Android plugin in the Android Studio).

I haven't take a look about which dep we use for Android integrations. It seems reasonable that we rely on ~.androidstudio only since ~.android looks like a subset of ~.androidstudio. https://github.com/JetBrains/android
(Look like theoratically they are the same).

So we may be able remove the ~.android without breaking anything.

[helin24]

@AlexV525

Hmm.. are you saying now that perhaps we don't need this line entirely? (i.e. are you referring to org.jetbrains.android with ~.android?)

<depends optional="true" config-file="studio-contribs.xml">org.jetbrains.android</depends>

My understanding is this:

• If the flutter plugin is installed into Android Studio, then the dependency com.intellij.modules.androidstudio is present, because this is bundled into Android Studio. And so therefore we want to include studio-contribs.xml to have the functionality that depends on Android Studio-related classes.
• If the flutter plugin is installed into IntelliJ IDEA, then the dependency com.intellij.modules.androidstudio is not present. However, we want to check for the dependency org.jetbrains.android, which is the Android plugin. If org.jetbrains.android is present, then (maybe) we should also include studio-contribs.xml.
• Perhaps there are cases where someone would be in Android Studio and also have the Android plugin? In which case it sounds like based on your investigation, this is redundant for them (unrelated to the flutter plugin).

Maybe the outstanding question now is what functionality the line in question:

<depends optional="true" config-file="studio-contribs.xml">org.jetbrains.android</depends>

contributes (or could contribute, with studio-contribs.xml included) to IntelliJ IDEA users.

Let me know if my understanding is in line with your thinking.

[AlexV525]

Maybe the outstanding question now is what functionality the line in question:

<depends optional="true" config-file="studio-contribs.xml">org.jetbrains.android</depends>

contributes (or could contribute, with studio-contribs.xml included) to IntelliJ IDEA users.

Let me know if my understanding is in line with your thinking.

@helin24 : I think you are correct. But how would I test this using the current configuration? I've tried many times to runIde with IC but always starts an Android Studio instance.