Move psxml type definitions from SMA to Security module

[iSazonov]

PR Summary

Replace #16349
Fix #14095

PR Context

PR Checklist

• PR has a meaningful title
  • Use the present tense and imperative mood when describing your changes
• Summarized changes
• Make sure all .h, .cpp, .cs, .ps1 and .psm1 files have the correct copyright header
• This PR is ready to merge and is not Work in Progress.
  • If the PR is work in progress, please add the prefix WIP: or [ WIP ] to the beginning of the title (the WIP bot will keep its status check at Pending while the prefix is present) and remove the prefix when the PR is ready.
• Breaking changes
  • None
  • OR
  • Experimental feature(s) needed
    • Experimental feature name(s):
• User-facing changes
  • Not Applicable
  • OR
  • Documentation needed
    • Issue filed:
• Testing - New and feature
  • N/A or can only be tested interactively
  • OR
  • Make sure you've added a new test if existing tests do not effectively test the code changed
• Tooling
  • I have considered the user experience from a tooling perspective and don't believe tooling will be impacted.
  • OR
  • I have considered the user experience from a tooling perspective and opened an issue in the relevant tool repository. This may include:
    • Impact on PowerShell Editor Services which is used in the PowerShell extension for VSCode
      (which runs in a different PS Host).
      • Issue filed:
    • Impact on Completions (both in the console and in editors) - one of PowerShell's most powerful features.
      • Issue filed:
    • Impact on PSScriptAnalyzer (which provides linting & formatting in the editor extensions).
      • Issue filed:
    • Impact on EditorSyntax (which provides syntax highlighting with in VSCode, GitHub, and many other editors).
      • Issue filed:

[Fs00]

I want to point out that this PR would also fix #14095 😃

[ghost]

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

[rkeithhill]

LGTM

[JamesWTruher]

i think the strong argument here is the breaking of the circular dependency.

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 213 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Large
Size       : +102 -111
Percentile : 61.3%

Total files changed: 5

Change summary by file extension:
.psd1 : +1 -0
.ps1xml : +100 -0
.cs : +0 -109
.ps1 : +1 -2

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[daxian-dbw]

@SteveL-MSFT and @JamesWTruher This is a breaking change:

• Before this change, a user doesn't need to explicitly import the Microsoft.PowerShell.Security module to use the code properties defined for an instance of System.Security.AccessControl.ObjectSecurity.
• After this change, a user needs to explicitly import Microsoft.PowerShell.Security module in order to use those code properties and code methods.

Are you fine to accept this breaking change?

[SteveL-MSFT]

@daxian-dbw I did a search on GitHub for use of AccessToString and all the cases I looked at use Get-Acl which comes from the Security module. Although it's possible using .NET APIs to get an ObjectSecurity instance, it would seem that most, if not all, usage is coming from this module. Seems unlikely that someone would be impacted and the workaround is to import the Security module.

[JamesWTruher]

@SteveL-MSFT and @JamesWTruher This is a breaking change:

• Before this change, a user doesn't need to explicitly import the Microsoft.PowerShell.Security module to use the code properties defined for an instance of System.Security.AccessControl.ObjectSecurity.
• After this change, a user needs to explicitly import Microsoft.PowerShell.Security module in order to use those code properties and code methods.

Are you fine to accept this breaking change?

I think the general use case is going to because someone invoked Get-Acl or some other command from the module which will result in autoloading and those folks will never be affected by this change. However, there are some scenarios where this won't be the case, and those folks will need to load the module. I'm having trouble handicapping the probabilities of those scenarios, though. I don't think it's going to happen very often, and enabling the behavior is pretty easy. It will definitely need documenting, but I think it's ok.

[daxian-dbw]

/rebase

[github-actions]

Started rebase: https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/actions/runs/2736080597

GitHub

Move psxml type definitions from SMA to Security module · PowerShell/PowerShell@9fe96f3

PowerShell for every system! Contribute to PowerShell/PowerShell development by creating an account on GitHub.

[daxian-dbw]

Just checked on Linux, Access Control List APIs are only supported on Windows, so the changes to src/Modules/Windows/Microsoft.PowerShell.Security/Microsoft.PowerShell.Security.psd1 is sufficient, not need to change the Unix version of Microsoft.PowerShell.Security.psd1.

[ghost]

🎉v7.3.0-preview.7 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

• Release Notes