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

Add Windows SDK 16299 to VS2019 image #770

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 13, 2019

Conversation

Projects
None yet
7 participants
@glennawatson
Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 7, 2019

This addresses 16299 missing from the Visual Studio 2019 image, as mentioned in #734

@rmarinho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 30, 2019

xamarin/xamarin.forms needs this also to build on VS2019 image

@dansiegel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 9, 2019

This is a high impact issue would really appreciate if someone from the team could merge this!

@davidstaheli

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 10, 2019

@vijayma, @azureDaveOps, and @alepauly can this be merged?

@alepauly

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 13, 2019

This is a high impact issue would really appreciate if someone from the team could merge this!

@dansiegel - we're working on adding 18362 instead, that should be good for xamarin.forms, correct?

@glennawatson

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 13, 2019

A little confused isn't 18362 still in preview and the 2019 image using retail visual studio 2019?

I know there are plans to have a preview agent wouldn't it make more sense there.

Also couldn't you have both to support backwards compatibility?

@RLittlesII

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 13, 2019

So VS 2019 is "stable" and 16299 is the latest stable version? 18362 is a preview version? So why would we put the preview in the stable channel? I don't think I mind having 18362 as an option, not the only option. If I am not ready to take a dependency on preview parts, that puts me in a bad situation, no?

@alepauly

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 13, 2019

@glennawatson, @RLittlesII - you are both correct, apologies for some reason I thought 18362 had come out of preview. I'll merge. Thanks!

@alepauly alepauly self-requested a review May 13, 2019

@alepauly alepauly merged commit 63ab825 into microsoft:master May 13, 2019

1 check passed

license/cla All CLA requirements met.
@dansiegel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 13, 2019

@alepauly thanks for merging... keep in mind that adding support for 18362 which would be a good call as well doesn't really solve the root issue. Libraries need to be able to build based on older UWP SDK's because if I build for 18362 then any downstream app that consumes my library would only be able to target back to 18362. When a library builds for 16299 (which is where netstandard2.0 support was added) it allows app developers to target minimum support for that version and build for a newer version. Which of course is helpful on account of the fact that a lot of Enterprises are slow to adopt updates.

@alepauly

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 13, 2019

@dansiegel - agreed, but we have some disk size constraints that force us to be picky on these. I'm sure we'll end up adding 18362 but we'll probably need to make some other changes for that to happen. thanks.

@glennawatson

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 13, 2019

@alepauly how long does it take for these sorts of changes take to hit the agents?

@dansiegel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 13, 2019

@alepauly if space is a concern I would keep the 16299 and swap out one of the other SDK's when you go to add 18362... 16299 is a critical point SDK where libraries are building against it because it was the point at which we got .netstandard2.0 support for UWP.

@glennawatson glennawatson deleted the glennawatson:glennawatson-fix-16299-missing branch May 13, 2019

@alepauly

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 15, 2019

@alepauly how long does it take for these sorts of changes take to hit the agents?

@glennawatson - We normally roll out new images every three weeks. These changes will make it in the images we start rolling out next week, so assuming no delays you'll see them in all Azure DevOps orgs during the week of May 27. It takes about a week from image generation for images to reach all orgs.

@dansiegel - thanks for the info, we'll keep that in mind when we're ready to add 18362.

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.