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

FSharp.Core version conflict between Fantomas.Core and Fantomas.FCS #2374

Closed
thinkbeforecoding opened this issue Jul 19, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2375
Closed

FSharp.Core version conflict between Fantomas.Core and Fantomas.FCS #2374

thinkbeforecoding opened this issue Jul 19, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2375

Comments

@thinkbeforecoding
Copy link
Contributor

I'm trying to use Fantomas.Core to format the FSharp.Data.WsdlGenerator generated code, but I have a problem with the references.

The Fantomas.Core nuget has a reference on FSharp.Core with a >= 6.0.3 version restriction, and it also references Fantomas.FCS that has a ref on FSharp.Core with a == 6.0.1 restriction. (using versoin 5.0.0-beta-001, but it is the same with all version of Fantomas.Core)

These two restrictions are in conflict and cause problem both when adding the nuget, and at runtime.

What is the necessity of the strict restriction in Fantomas.FCS ? If this is necessary, Fantomas.Core should also apply this restriction.

Today, Fantomas.Core uses the dependencies from the main group, while Fantomas.FCS uses dependencies from the compiler group. This explains the different versions.

@nojaf
Copy link
Contributor

nojaf commented Jul 19, 2022

Hello, I'm not sure if the strict restriction is still required. I think it originally came from the FCS having a fixed version on F# Core.
I would accept a PR that fixes this.
I guess both should accept 6 or higher.

@thinkbeforecoding
Copy link
Contributor Author

PR submitted 😄

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants