Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

incremented precedence for project templates #4299

Conversation

vlada-shubina
Copy link
Member

@vlada-shubina vlada-shubina commented Jan 24, 2022

#4295 to release/7.0.1xx-preview1

Issue:

#4296

Description:

#4296 discovered that that templates from .NET 6 SDK and .NET 7 SDK conflicts due to unchanged precedence. PR increases the precedence for .NET 7 templates.

Customer impact:

unable to use console / classlib templates when both .NET 6 SDK and .NET 7 SDK is installed.

Regression:

yes

Risk:

Low. Tested manually and with automation tests.

@vlada-shubina vlada-shubina added the servicing-consider The issue to be considered for servicing label Jan 24, 2022
@vlada-shubina vlada-shubina requested a review from a team as a code owner January 24, 2022 19:30
@joeloff
Copy link
Member

joeloff commented Jan 25, 2022

Just curious, but could the precedence be generated based on the .NET major/minor version, that way when we rebrand for a new release, this change won't be necessary in the future?

@vlada-shubina
Copy link
Member Author

Just curious, but could the precedence be generated based on the .NET major/minor version, that way when we rebrand for a new release, this change won't be necessary in the future?

In theory, this is possible however precedence is integer value, so it needs a bit of math and also an approach on how to update json files automatically. We are looking to introducing MSBuild tasks for validation at the build time, that will allow to catch these errors.
#3828

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
servicing-consider The issue to be considered for servicing
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants