[Many] run agp update to support jdk17 1/N

[reidbaker]

Part 1/N flutter/flutter#122213

Doc with significantly more context. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hTXkjbUrBnXgu8NQsth1c3aEqo77rWoEj8CcsQ39wwQ/edit#

• Run AGP upgrade assistant on packages/espresso/example

• Run AGP upgrade assistant on packages/animations/example and update target sdk version to 33

• Run AGP upgrade assistant on packages/extension_google_sign_in.../example and update google services version

• Run AGP upgrade assistant on packages/dynamic_layouts/example and kotlin version

• Run AGP upgrade assistant on packages/flutter_adaptive_scaffold/example

• Run AGP upgrade assistant on packages/flutter_markdown/example and update kotlin version

• Run AGP upgrade assistant on packages/flutter_android_lifecycle/example and add gradle wrapper files

• Run AGP upgrade assistant on packages/go_router/example and update kotlin version

• 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 and followed the [relevant style guides] and ran the auto-formatter. (Unlike the flutter/flutter repo, the flutter/packages repo does use dart format.)

• I signed the [CLA].

• The title of the PR starts with the name of the package surrounded by square brackets, e.g. [shared_preferences]

• I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above.

• I updated pubspec.yaml with an appropriate new version according to the [pub versioning philosophy], or this PR is [exempt from version changes].

• I updated CHANGELOG.md to add a description of the change, [following repository CHANGELOG style].

• 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.

[flutter-dashboard]

It looks like this pull request may not have tests. Please make sure to add tests before merging. If you need an exemption to this rule, contact Hixie on the #hackers channel in Chat (don't just cc him here, he won't see it! He's on Discord!).

If you are not sure if you need tests, consider this rule of thumb: the purpose of a test is to make sure someone doesn't accidentally revert the fix. Ask yourself, is there anything in your PR that you feel it is important we not accidentally revert back to how it was before your fix?

Reviewers: Read the Tree Hygiene page and make sure this patch meets those guidelines before LGTMing.

[stuartmorgan]

@reidbaker reidbaker assigned stuartmorgan and gmackall 17 hours ago

Was this supposed to be reviewers instead of assignees?

[stuartmorgan]

I always forget: does this file affect plugin clients, or is this only used when building the plugin project directly (i.e., for things like unit tests)?

[reidbaker]

I thought it would only be used locally but when I compared the download of flutter_plugin_android_lifecycle and flutter_markdown it appears this would add a gradlew file which I have to assume will be used.

This is not good because I think this means we have been using an undefined version of gradle but for this PR I am reverting it. I wanted this to impact example apps only and do change log impacting changes independently.

[reidbaker]

@reidbaker reidbaker assigned stuartmorgan and gmackall 17 hours ago

Was this supposed to be reviewers instead of assignees?

yes it was 🤦

[stuartmorgan]

Overriding changelog: these example changes aren't interesting to clients.

[stuartmorgan]

LGTM once the CI failures are worked out (let me know if you think whatever you need to adjust to fix those needs re-review)