Skip to content

Conversation

@mhutch
Copy link
Contributor

@mhutch mhutch commented Aug 3, 2016

  • Make consistent with xamarin-ios
  • Add modern $(VisualStudioVersion)-based import
  • Add 4.0 import, remove 3.0 import

* Make consistent with xamarin-ios
* Add modern $(VisualStudioVersion)-based import
* Add 4.0 import, remove 3.0 import
@dnfclas
Copy link

dnfclas commented Aug 3, 2016

Hi @mhutch, I'm your friendly neighborhood .NET Foundation Pull Request Bot (You can call me DNFBOT). Thanks for your contribution!
You've already signed the contribution license agreement. Thanks!

The agreement was validated by .NET Foundation and real humans are currently evaluating your PR.

TTYL, DNFBOT;

@mhutch
Copy link
Contributor Author

mhutch commented Aug 3, 2016

(see also dotnet/macios#541)

@jonpryor
Copy link
Contributor

jonpryor commented Aug 4, 2016

@radical: Please review this PR.

Additionally, I have no idea how this PR interacts with our desired F# policy of "provide your own NuGet package": https://bugzilla.xamarin.com/show_bug.cgi?id=41262

We've decided that the saner course of action is to have developers rely on the F# NuGet packages, as those will be more frequently updated that what is provided with Xamarin.Android.

@mhutch
Copy link
Contributor Author

mhutch commented Aug 4, 2016

It doesn't interact with it at all. This is for the build, not the standard library.

Unless you're also suggesting we deprecate this target and require one to be shipped in the aforementioned NuGet.

@jonpryor
Copy link
Contributor

jonpryor commented Aug 4, 2016

It doesn't interact with it at all. This is for the build, not the standard library.

I have no idea, which is why I asked. :-)

Is there any connection between the build system and the referenced FSharp.Core.dll file? Xamarin.Android is distributing FSharp.Core.dll v3.98.4.0; will the be a problem with the v4.0 build system?

@nosami
Copy link
Contributor

nosami commented Aug 4, 2016

The referenced FSharp.Core.dll file is a project template issue - it's not connected to this PR.

I've tested this PR along with NuGet'd FSharp.Core - no issues.

@jonpryor jonpryor merged commit 158a0f1 into dotnet:master Aug 4, 2016
radekdoulik pushed a commit to radekdoulik/xamarin-android that referenced this pull request Aug 12, 2016
* Make consistent with xamarin-ios
* Add modern `$(VisualStudioVersion)`-based import
* Add 4.0 import, remove 3.0 import
radical pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 8, 2018
[dependencies] Bump cecil to match the one used in 2017-04.
jonpryor added a commit to jonpryor/xamarin-android that referenced this pull request Nov 4, 2021
Changes: dotnet/android-tools@a5194e9...0a22957

  * dotnet/android-tools@0a22957: [Xamarin.Android.Tools.AndroidSdk] Parse Properties after header (dotnet#143)
  * dotnet/android-tools@dac3a47: [Xamarin.Android.Tools.AndroidSdk] Add API-31 to KnownVersions (dotnet#141)
  * dotnet/android-tools@fc976d8: [Xamarin.Android.Tools.AndroidSdk] Add JdkInfo.GetSupportedJdkInfos() (dotnet#142)
  * dotnet/android-tools@34e98e2: [build] Allow Assembly "vendorization" (dotnet#136)
  * dotnet/android-tools@061bcc2: [build] Import "parent directory.override.targets" (dotnet#135)
jonpryor added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 5, 2021
Changes: dotnet/android-tools@a5194e9...0a22957

  * dotnet/android-tools@0a22957: [Xamarin.Android.Tools.AndroidSdk] Parse Properties after header (#143)
  * dotnet/android-tools@dac3a47: [Xamarin.Android.Tools.AndroidSdk] Add API-31 to KnownVersions (#141)
  * dotnet/android-tools@fc976d8: [Xamarin.Android.Tools.AndroidSdk] Add JdkInfo.GetSupportedJdkInfos() (#142)
  * dotnet/android-tools@34e98e2: [build] Allow Assembly "vendorization" (#136)
  * dotnet/android-tools@061bcc2: [build] Import "parent directory.override.targets" (#135)
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 6, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants