Elliotte Rusty Harold

Error: Failed to CreateArtifact: Received non-retryable error: Failed request: (409) Conflict: an artifact with this name already exists on the workflow run

Looks like it's simply failing to me: ``` java.lang.AssertionError at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:87) at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:42) at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:53) at org.apache.maven.surefire.its.JUnit47RedirectOutputIT.checkReports(JUnit47RedirectOutputIT.java:51) at ``` Am I missing something?

Thinking about the case where BaseWidget defines public void hide() and public Widget extends BaseWidget my current thinking is that this is a problem and should be flagged by PMD....

Probably because interface methods are public by default these days. Good catch. It shouldn't report those since there's no option to fix them.

If a project doesn't pay attention to javac warnings, they are unlikely to pay attention to pmd warnings. I think not duplicating existing JDK warnings should be a hard line.

I know @steveburnett disagrees with me about this, but I really don't think we should be including dependency upgrades in the release notes.

Looks like the most recent version is 2.18.0

I prefer 2.18.0 but I'm not sure others agree with this. Don't overthink it. Either 2.17.2 or 2.18 is better than what we have now.

We need to figure out if the test failures are related or just flaky. I've rerun a couple of times so they might be related. Either way, we need to...

@slawekjaranowski notes that "Instead of using it you can exclude hamcrest-core from junit and then use hamcrest with the newer version". Might (or might not) be possible to note this...