fix: max System.Collections.Immutable version ++

[toddbaert]

remove max System.Collections.Immutable version

fixes: #136

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #137 (46fa6f2) into main (16f3300) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #137   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.64%   94.64%           
=======================================
  Files          20       20           
  Lines         542      542           
  Branches       39       39           
=======================================
  Hits          513      513           
  Misses         16       16           
  Partials       13       13           

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[kinyoklion]

Generally speaking this is a little concerning, because MS could change something and cause unpredictable behavior. On the other hand they have given up on the version having much meaning, so maybe this is the only alternative.

[toddbaert]

Generally speaking this is a little concerning, because MS could change something and cause unpredictable behavior. On the other hand they have given up on the version having much meaning, so maybe this is the only alternative.

I was concerned about this too... but I think if there was a breaking change the impacted us, we would see it relatively quickly in the CI, as long is it was in .NET 6 or 7.. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

[kinyoklion]

Generally speaking this is a little concerning, because MS could change something and cause unpredictable behavior. On the other hand they have given up on the version having much meaning, so maybe this is the only alternative.

I was concerned about this too... but I think if there was a breaking change the impacted us, we would see it relatively quickly in the CI, as long is it was in .NET 6 or 7.. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

I am sure we would detect it fast, but would consumer applications basically be breaking at the same time? Because they nuget install and different packages are fetched?

[kinyoklion]

Generally speaking dotnet tries to install the lowest compatible version (backward from most package systems), at least it used to, so it may not be a problem.

[toddbaert]

Generally speaking dotnet tries to install the lowest compatible version (backward from most package systems), at least it used to, so it may not be a problem.

I just found this out, yes. Locally this is causing 1.7.1 to be resolved, which doesn't really help in testing.

I just manually forced version 7 and ran the unit and e2e test suite and that worked... so I guess the more conservative option would be to allow up to v8 (exclusive).

Any thoughts?

[kinyoklion]

Generally speaking a dotnet application will actually automatically generate binding redirects allowing you to use any version. ASP.Net applications do not, which is generally where this problem comes up.

For instance, for LD, this comes up with Microsoft.Logging.Extensions all the time:

<dependentAssembly>
  <assemblyIdentity name="Microsoft.Extensions.Logging"
    publicKeyToken="adb9793829ddae60"
    culture="en-us" />
  <bindingRedirect oldVersion="6.0.0" newVersion="7.0.0.0" />
</dependentAssembly>

Updating it to 8.0.0 is safest. But it does mean it needs basically annually updated. Because MS will release the next one.

[toddbaert]

Generally speaking a dotnet application will actually automatically generate binding redirects allowing you to use any version. ASP.Net applications do not, which is generally where this problem comes up.

For instance, for LD, this comes up with Microsoft.Logging.Extensions all the time:

<dependentAssembly>
  <assemblyIdentity name="Microsoft.Extensions.Logging"
    publicKeyToken="adb9793829ddae60"
    culture="en-us" />
  <bindingRedirect oldVersion="6.0.0" newVersion="7.0.0.0" />
</dependentAssembly>

Updating it to 8.0.0 is safest. But it does mean it needs basically annually updated. Because MS will release the next one.

OK I'll do the conservative thing for now and then think on it more. Maybe we can automate it somehow.

[kinyoklion]

May want to update the PR title, for the release note.