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

Improve warning message when using licenseUrl #8000

Open
zivkan opened this Issue Apr 14, 2019 · 6 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@zivkan
Copy link

zivkan commented Apr 14, 2019

Some customers do not find it obvious how to act on the warning. For example this VS feedback: https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/content/problem/504915/nuget-package-license-warning-not-resolvable.html

It's easy to understand why customers seeing the following warning message:

warning NU5125: The ‘licenseUrl’ element will be deprecated. Consider using the ‘license’ element instead.

believe it's possible to simply rename the licenseUrl element to license. The NU5125 docs aren't particularly good either. It doesn't contain any actionable information on the page itself, and just contains a link to a github issue that has even more links and a discussion. The point is a customer who wants to do the right thing has to make an unreasonable amount of effort just to find examples on how to use the new embedded license feature when they see the NU5125 warning.

I suggest we change the URL in the NU5125 docs to a page that has clear, concise instruction on how to use embedded licenses, and we should also include the URL to those docs in the warning message for anyone using nuget.exe or the dotnet cli, since they won't have a clickable link like in the Visual Studio error list.

@zivkan zivkan added this to the 5.2 milestone Apr 14, 2019

@nkolev92

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nkolev92 commented Apr 15, 2019

You want the warning message to contain a link to the warning docs?

I have a philosophical problem with that. We should not have hard links from the product.
If you are suggesting aka.ms link, I'd say we should limit our exposure to potential docs site change root causes.

I'd be open to enhancing the warning message without any hard links.
Improving the dosc should be a fast & easy win.

@nkolev92 nkolev92 modified the milestones: 5.2, Backlog Apr 15, 2019

@nkolev92

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nkolev92 commented Apr 15, 2019

Milestoned items don't need priority & backlog items have a priority.

@zivkan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

zivkan commented Apr 15, 2019

At the very least, the message shouldn't make it sound like it's possible to rename licenseUrl to license. It's easy to understand how some customers may have that impression, even if that's not what it actually says.

@nkolev92

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nkolev92 commented Apr 15, 2019

I'd imagine it's a tiny minority that'd interpret it as such, but yeah we should do our best to improve it.

how about;

The ‘licenseUrl’ element is deprecated. The licenses should be self-contained within the package. Please use the ‘license’ element instead, which allows you to specify a standard license name or include a license file.

//cc @karann-msft

@karann-msft

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

karann-msft commented Apr 16, 2019

warning NU5125: The ‘licenseUrl’ element is deprecated. Consider using the ‘license’ element instead. It allows you to specify a standard license expression or include a license file as part of the package,

@zivkan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

zivkan commented Apr 17, 2019

My suggestion:

warning NU5125: The ‘licenseUrl’ element is deprecated. It is possible to specify a license expression or include a license file in a package using the ‘license’ element.

I also have issues with the NU5125 docs, but I think it's easier/quicker for me to create a PR rather than explain it and wait for someone else to work on it. Basically, imagine you're a customer who saw the warning message and wants to migrate to the new, supported feature. The current docs require at least 2 more clicks to find actionable information, but there are 6 links and only 2 seem to have actionable information, so there's basically a 1/3 chance they'll find the info in 2 clicks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.