Flyway auto-configuration does not work with Flyway 10 when using GraalVM

[UbiquitousBear]

I've first seen this when trying to build a native SB image 3.2.1 with flyway-core:10.4.1. Flyway Autoconfigure NativeImageResourceProviderCustomizer (code link) creates a custom org.flywaydb.core.api.ResourceProvider using a org.flywaydb.core.internal.scanner.Scanner.

The constructor for Scanner has changed between version 9 and 10, whereby the former accepted more arguments.

The code:

Scanner<JavaMigration> scanner = new Scanner<>(JavaMigration.class,
					Arrays.asList(configuration.getLocations()), configuration.getClassLoader(),
					configuration.getEncoding(), configuration.isDetectEncoding(), false, new ResourceNameCache(),
					new LocationScannerCache(), configuration.isFailOnMissingLocations());

should be replaced with

Scanner<JavaMigration> scanner = new Scanner<>(
     JavaMigration.class,                   // Class<I> implementedInterface
     false,                                            // boolean stream
     new ResourceNameCache(),    // ResourceNameCache resourceNameCache
     new LocationScannerCache(), // LocationScannerCache locationScannerCache
     configuration                              // Configuration configuration [FluentConfiguration provided will do]					
);

I can make the change for this in SB, however, how should Flyway 9 be handled?

[goverdhan07]

@UbiquitousBear - I was wondering if we could introduce a condition wherein if the flyway version is >= 10 use the newer constructor and if version == 9 use the older constructor that accepts more arguments. let me know what you think?

[MazizEsa]

Is it open for contribution? I am interested to work on this.

[wilkinsona]

Thanks, @MazizEsa. It's all yours.

[MazizEsa]

@wilkinsona thanks. Which branch I should merge fix to?

[scottfrederick]

@MazizEsa If you want to submit the changes to the 3.1.x branch, we can merge it there and then merge forward to other branches. It's also fine if you submit the change to main, and we can rebase it to 3.1.x ourselves.

[MazizEsa]

Got it @scottfrederick . Thanks!

[wilkinsona]

How's it going, @MazizEsa?