Update templates to 8.0#45979
Conversation
wtgodbe
requested review from
a team,
captainsafia and
mkArtakMSFT
as code owners
| "generatorVersions": "[1.0.0.0-*)", | ||
| "description": "LESS is a language that compiles into CSS", | ||
| "groupIdentity": "Microsoft.DotNet.Web.ClientItems.Less", | ||
| "precedence": "100", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@MackinnonBuck a few of these were at 100, should they stay there?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@wtgodbe, @MackinnonBuck made it clear in dotnet/spa-templates#105 discussions that consistency should win. Please use 9800 everywhere in this repo.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I want to make sure these aren't "special" in some way, it's possible they weren't in mind when we were talking about the spa-templates changes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
They aren't special and I specifically mentioned "item and project templates" at least once in that conversation 😁
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You did, but even among the Item templates there's a discrepancy between 100 and 600, and in the case where it's 100 the precedence hasn't been touched since the templates were added 5 years ago - that conversation doesn't give me sufficient confidence that it's definitely correct to bump these now
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just chatted offline w @phenning about this, he said the following:
it is actually fine and probably preferable to increase them, with the ITEM templates in particular though the reason it was never done I believe is because the content itself in the templates really has been pretty static between net versions, and to add that we didn't really have the best item template experience in visual studio for template engine templates. The way it was before is that the last installed version would win, and we install the templates in order of NET version, so net6.0 templates, then net7.0 templates, etc.
So we haven't done it in the past because the content is static - but I prefer starting to do it going forward so people don't hit this confusion in the future.
Furthermore he pointed out that dotnet/maui has a property they use for precedence/identity - we could do something similar so that we don't have to update every file every year: #45995
| "type": "item" | ||
| }, | ||
| "groupIdentity": "Microsoft.Web.Grpc.Protobuf", | ||
| "precedence": "600", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Likewise some others were at 600, should these stay there or go to 9800? @MackinnonBuck
ghost
added this to the
3 participants
Part of #45492. Also update docs to reflect new template precedence scheme