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

Only netstandard projects #135

Merged
merged 10 commits into from Nov 13, 2017
Merged

Only netstandard projects #135

merged 10 commits into from Nov 13, 2017

Conversation

masojus
Copy link
Contributor

@masojus masojus commented Nov 11, 2017

Remove the 3.5/4.5/PCL projects, so now there's only the netstandard2.0/netfx4.5 multi-targeted project and the netcore2.0 test project.

Lots of moved files, so the interesting parts are the .sln/.csproj and config/script/props files related to building/packing/CI/testing/etc.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+3.1%) to 75.802% when pulling 639d870 on jm_OnlyNetStandardProj into fdefe32 on jm_FormattingConfigChanges.

@masojus masojus changed the base branch from jm_FormattingConfigChanges to master November 12, 2017 01:40
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+3.1%) to 75.802% when pulling 1980af1 on jm_OnlyNetStandardProj into 536b56b on master.

"the SharedVersionInfo.cs file. Then, tries to create a new NuGet package, which will fail if "
"nuget.exe isn't in the PATH or the script's directory.`n"
"Updates the Version in the .csproj file. Then, tries to create a new NuGet package, which will"
"fail if nuget.exe isn't in the PATH or the script's directory.`n"
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This comment is wrong, since we aren't directly using nuget.exe but rather rely on the dotnet core tools being installed, so I'll need to fix that.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed in another commit.

Copy link
Contributor

@baumatron baumatron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Awesome! Good to see these gone.

.appveyor.yml Outdated
@@ -102,7 +96,7 @@ test_script:
#
# Also use -oldStyle flag which uses an alternate instrumentation hook that is available for .NET Core
# Some comments on this can be found here: https://github.com/OpenCover/opencover/issues/601
- .\tools\OpenCover.4.6.519\tools\OpenCover.Console.exe -target:dotnet.exe -targetargs:"test --logger \"trx;LogFileName=netstandard_test_results.xml\" .\Keen.NetStandard.Test\Keen.NetStandard.Test.csproj /property:DebugType=Full" -mergeoutput -output:coverage.xml -filter:"+[*]* -[*.Test]*" -oldStyle -returntargetcode -register:user
- .\tools\OpenCover.4.6.519\tools\OpenCover.Console.exe -target:dotnet.exe -targetargs:"test --logger \"trx;LogFileName=netstandard_test_results.xml\" .\Keen.NetStandard.Test\Keen.NetStandard.Test.csproj /property:DebugType=Full" -mergeoutput -output:coverage.xml -filter:"+[*]* -[*.Test]* -[Moq*]*" -oldStyle -returntargetcode -register:user

# Upload merged coverage results from both test runs
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This comment is outdated.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ha, I was looking at OpenCover Issue 601 thinking you meant the -oldStyle flag wasn't needed anymore, but then I realized you were referring to the "from both test runs" part 😆, will fix.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+3.1%) to 75.802% when pulling 16046c9 on jm_OnlyNetStandardProj into 536b56b on master.

@masojus
Copy link
Contributor Author

masojus commented Nov 13, 2017

Merging even though the MacOS CI job hasn't finished...changes since last successful MacOS build are comment-only. If there's an issue, I'll deal with the merge of this and PR #136 directly in master, but it'd unlikely.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants