Update EmsdkPackageVersion to use version from dependency flow

[akoeplinger]

It got hardcoded a while ago to workaround a build problem.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR updates the build’s Emscripten SDK provisioning versioning so it no longer relies on a hardcoded EmsdkPackageVersion value in eng/Versions.props, instead sourcing it from a dependency-flow-updated property.

Changes:

• Replace the hardcoded EmsdkPackageVersion (10.0.0) with $(MicrosoftDotNetApiCompatTaskPackageVersion).
• Add an explanatory comment about why a stable, dependency-flow-backed version property is used.

[github-actions]

Caution

Security scanning requires review for Code Review

Details

The threat detection results could not be parsed. The workflow output should be reviewed before merging.

Review the workflow run logs for details.

Code Review: Update EmsdkPackageVersion to use version from dependency flow

Verdict: APPROVED ✅

Summary

This is a minimal, well-scoped fix. EmsdkPackageVersion was previously hardcoded to 10.0.0, likely as a workaround for a build issue. The adjacent MicrosoftNETRuntimeEmscriptenVersion already uses $(MicrosoftDotNetApiCompatTaskPackageVersion) for the same reason (emsdk package ID contains a changing version). This PR makes EmsdkPackageVersion consistent by also using that flowing variable.

Analysis

Category	Finding
Correctness	✅ The variable $(MicrosoftDotNetApiCompatTaskPackageVersion) is already used on the line above for the same purpose. Consumers in eng/AcquireEmscriptenSdk.targets and src/mono/mono.proj reference $(EmsdkPackageVersion) for NuGet package restore — using a flowing version is correct.
Consistency	✅ The added comment explains why MicrosoftDotNetApiCompatTaskPackageVersion is used as a proxy, matching the existing pattern.
Risk	Low — single property value change in a version props file, aligning with an existing sibling property.

No issues found. The change is correct and improves maintainability by removing a hardcoded version that would need manual bumps.

Generated by Code Review for issue #128261 · ● 710.9K · ◷