-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 882
Refactor templates into single template groups that allow you select TFM and aspire version #6365
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
Changes from 3 commits
47621fb
cb359b9
ee6fdd0
220fbe0
bfb42c1
b82117a
ea02bf8
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My understanding is that
Microsoft.Extensions.Http.Resilienceis on a "tip support" policy. Meaning that only the latest version is supported. (I think there maybe a nuance here where the8.0version is LTS, but I can't seem to find the public policy.)Given the above, I think we should always be referencing the current/latest version of
Microsoft.Extensions.Http.Resiliencefrom our templates regardless of TFM chosen. Even if you are targetingnet8.0, we would bring in the 9.0 version ofMicrosoft.Extensions.Http.Resilience.See also: Use 8.0 era dependencies for non net9.0 TFMs (dotnet/extensions#5470)
cc @joperezr
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Shouldn't our repo be using the 9.x version then too? Currently it's using the 8.x version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes. That's part of this as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should I hold off on a change here until we get consensus?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think there is an agreement here. As @eerhardt points out, we want to use the tip of this package both in net8 and net9. There is still the PR that he pointed out above which hasn't been merged but will be merged before 9.0 ships.