You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
C# client supports .NET Standard 1.3 under the misnomer of v5.0. We don't yet support .NET Standard 2.0, although it should be a minor upgrade by the IDE to import our generated projects.
v5.0 refers to the PCL version, which is a different project file structure (I hope to fix this issue in the next week or two by separating PCL, netstandard, and .net framework into separate options). This should allow us to clearly differentiate between the TargetFramework and TargetFrameworkVersion mixture we currently have.
For reference, you can create two library projects in Visual Studio, one .NET Standard 1.3 and one "Portable Library" modified from the default 4.0 to 5.0. Project structures differ like this:
Project files also have different structures, so even our PCL 5.0 generated code currently would require users to manually adjust the project to be truly PCL 5.0 (right now, it's just a .NET Framework library). I think at a minimum, we need to conditionally include the portable msbuild targets and the ProjectTypeGuids option.
.NET Standard 2.0 was just announced back in August. I'd need to evaluate changes for this addition.
My suggestion for this work is to differentiate clearly between .NET Framework, netstandard, and PCL versioning.
This may be easiest if we move to support something similar to a library option (e.g. framework). This would allow us to specify framework=dotnet and frameworkVersion=3.5 or framework=netstandard and frameworkVersion=1.3 rather than targetFramework=v3.5 or targetFramework=v5.0.
I don't know that there's that much difference between any of these, so I'm open to suggestions.
It may also be beneficial to sunset support for .net 3.5 and possibly .net 4.0 into separate projects to improve maintainability of the C# client generator.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Description
C# client supports .NET Standard 1.3 under the misnomer of v5.0. We don't yet support .NET Standard 2.0, although it should be a minor upgrade by the IDE to import our generated projects.
v5.0 refers to the PCL version, which is a different project file structure (I hope to fix this issue in the next week or two by separating PCL, netstandard, and .net framework into separate options). This should allow us to clearly differentiate between the
TargetFramework
andTargetFrameworkVersion
mixture we currently have.For reference, you can create two library projects in Visual Studio, one .NET Standard 1.3 and one "Portable Library" modified from the default 4.0 to 5.0. Project structures differ like this:
Project files also have different structures, so even our PCL 5.0 generated code currently would require users to manually adjust the project to be truly PCL 5.0 (right now, it's just a .NET Framework library). I think at a minimum, we need to conditionally include the portable msbuild targets and the
ProjectTypeGuids
option..NET Standard 2.0 was just announced back in August. I'd need to evaluate changes for this addition.
Swagger-codegen version
all
Swagger declaration file content or url
Command line used for generation
config-help -l csharp
Steps to reproduce
n\a (enhancement)
Related issues/PRs
Suggest a fix/enhancement
Related to #5527
My suggestion for this work is to differentiate clearly between .NET Framework, netstandard, and PCL versioning.
This may be easiest if we move to support something similar to a
library
option (e.g.framework
). This would allow us to specifyframework=dotnet
andframeworkVersion=3.5
orframework=netstandard
andframeworkVersion=1.3
rather thantargetFramework=v3.5
ortargetFramework=v5.0
.I don't know that there's that much difference between any of these, so I'm open to suggestions.
It may also be beneficial to sunset support for .net 3.5 and possibly .net 4.0 into separate projects to improve maintainability of the C# client generator.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: