Fix jitpack

[crazycat256]

What's new

Nothing

What's fixed

Jitpack
By default, jitpack uses java 8, this PR adds a jitpack.yml that tells it to use java 17

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (6060aa0) 66.70% compared to head (d6e0c81) 66.70%.

❗ Current head d6e0c81 differs from pull request most recent head 30c5989. Consider uploading reports for the commit 30c5989 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               dev4     #765      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     66.70%   66.70%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity     2407     2406       -1     
============================================
  Files           322      322              
  Lines         13946    13946              
  Branches       1586     1586              
============================================
- Hits           9303     9302       -1     
  Misses         3922     3922              
- Partials        721      722       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[0x3C50]

sdkman init and update can be skipped, jitpack does those two steps automatically. Take a look at the renderer jitpack.yml

[crazycat256]

I've removed these 2 steps

[Col-E]

@0x3C50 It looks this is incorrect, as removing this results in a failed build on JitPack.

https://jitpack.io/com/github/Col-E/Recaf/dev4-45a626cce9-1/build.log

I've added sdk update back in 02da7a8 and it seems to have resolved the issue.

https://jitpack.io/com/github/Col-E/Recaf/02da7a89cc/build.log

[0x3C50]

@0x3C50 It looks this is incorrect, as removing this results in a failed build on JitPack.

https://jitpack.io/com/github/Col-E/Recaf/dev4-45a626cce9-1/build.log

the build works on renderer. try openjdk?

[Col-E]

Ah I see the discrepancy, in renderer the jdk: block is configured rather than relying on sdk update

The update made to this PR didn't include it. Looks like both sdk update and specifying the jdk blob do the same thing.