Creating Cache Artifact #890

ramarag · 2017-02-19T06:55:30Z

With this change

dotnet-cache can cache packages with different versions at the same time, it further produces an artifact.xml which has the list of all the packages cached during dotnet-cache.

This artifact.xml should be used with publish filter option to remove the files which are already cached

@gkhanna79 @eerhardt @nguerrera PTAL

ramarag · 2017-02-20T01:25:41Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets

+  <Target Name="CacheWorkerMapper">
+
+    <ItemGroup>
+      <PackageToRestore Include ="@(PackageReference)" Condition="'%(PackageReference.IsImplicitlyDefined)' != 'true'"/>


Will remove this and replace it with DisableImplicitFrameworkReferences=true in the invocation of CacheWorkerMapper

ramarag · 2017-02-20T01:25:59Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/LockFileExtensions.cs

 using NuGet.Frameworks;
 using NuGet.Packaging.Core;
 using NuGet.ProjectModel;
-


will add a new line

ramarag · 2017-02-21T05:32:59Z

test/Microsoft.NET.Publish.Tests/Microsoft.NET.Publish.Tests.csproj

    </PackageReference>
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
+    <Compile Include="$(RepositoryRootDirectory)src\Tasks\Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks\PackageInfoHelpers.cs" Exclude="$(GlobalExclude)" />


@dsplaisted is it fine to include product code in test ? Or is there any other good way to consume this logic in tests

ramarag · 2017-02-21T23:11:06Z

also fixes #830

gkhanna79 · 2017-02-22T18:18:11Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/GetListofResolvedPackages.cs

+namespace Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks
+{
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Resolves the assemblies to be published for a .NET app.


".NET Core App"

"Resolves the list of packages..."

will change

gkhanna79 · 2017-02-22T18:20:21Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PackageInfoHelpers.cs

+        }
+    }
+
+    public class CacheArtifactParser


Can you please add some comments on the role of the type?

gkhanna79 · 2017-02-22T18:21:43Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PackageInfoHelpers.cs

+                    if (pkgname != null && version != null)
+                    {
+                        listofPackages.Add(new PackageInfo(pkgname.Value, version.Value));
+                    }


For diagnostics, can we emit details of the package reference being worked upon?

i am emitting them in its caller. as this code is shared with tests
https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/pull/890/files#diff-12149d9a659a09923162cd8cd2ac24d0R62

gkhanna79 · 2017-02-22T18:22:32Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/ProjectContext.cs

+                {
+                    if (filterLookup.ContainsKey(pkg.Name))
+                    {
+                        filterLookup[pkg.Name].Add(pkg);


Is the key case-sensitive?

Why are we trying to add a new value for an existing key? Per https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/k7z0zy8k(v=vs.110).aspx, Add would throw an exception.

Instead, should the key be made unique so that such a conflict does not happen when there are multiple entries for different versions of a given package?

The key is case-sensitive , as you can see from definition of filterLookup, it is a dictionary of hashset. This is necessary as we are indexing packages with just the package name for the purpose of efficient filtering, and out list could have same packages with different versions.

What happens when the entry XML file contains two entries with different versions but same cased name of the package?

HashSet does not throw, it just ignores duplicates

gkhanna79 · 2017-02-22T18:31:17Z

test/Microsoft.NET.Publish.Tests/GivenThatWeWantToCacheAProjectWithDependencies.cs

+        private static string testarch;
+        private static string tfm = "netcoreapp1.0";
+
+        static GivenThatWeWantToCacheAProjectWithDependencies()


do we have a test that validates that the filtered packages are coming from the cache once the app targeting the cache is activated?

Also @eerhardt @ramarag in VS F5 scenarios, is the F5 done against the output of publish or dotnet build? If the latter, shouldn't we enable build to also consume filter artifact.xml so that output of build also runs against the cache?

We only check for the layout in sdk repo.

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:38:58Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/GetListofResolvedPackages.cs

+
+        protected override void ExecuteCore()
+        {
+


nit: extra whitespace

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:39:47Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PackageInfoHelpers.cs

+
+                foreach (var pkginfo in doc.Elements("Project").Elements("ItemGroup").Elements("PackageReference"))
+                {
+


nit: extra whitepsace

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:40:15Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PublishAssembliesResolver.cs

 using NuGet.Frameworks;
 using NuGet.ProjectModel;

+


nit: extra whitespace

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:40:28Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PublishAssembliesResolver.cs

+        {
+            _hasallResolvedLibrariesBeenRecorded = true;
+            return _allResolvedPackages.Keys;
+        }


nit: missing whitepsace

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:40:37Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PublishAssembliesResolver.cs

+            _doNotTrackPackageAsResolved = doNotTrackPackageAsResolved;
+            return this;
+        }
+


nit: extra whitespace

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:50:09Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets

+          DependsOnTargets="RestoreForComposeCache;
+                            ComputeAndCopyFilesToCacheDirectory;"
+          Condition="!Exists($(CacheWorkerWorkingDir))" />
+    <!--


Nit: more whitespace issues. Avoid more than one blank line. And here the start of the comment for the next target looks like it's nested in the previous target as there is no blank line between them and the indentation is off.

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:50:57Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets

+  <Target Name="PrepforRestoreForComposeCache">
+
+    <PropertyGroup>
+      <_RPackageVersion>$(_RPackageVersion.Replace('*','-'))</_RPackageVersion>


What is RPackage? Again, Avoid abbreviations.

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:55:36Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.CrossGen.targets


    <MSBuild Projects="$(MSBuildProjectFullPath)"
                 Targets="RunCrossGen"
                 Properties="_CGenExe=$(_Crossgen);


It's weird that we're passing properties to msbuild invocation that are underscore prefix (signals 'private' by convention only). This seems like a public contract with the RunCrossGenTarget and so its inputs should have good names and not be underscore prefixed.

Also, again avoid obscure abbreviations. There is no point saving 4 characters to say CGen instead of CrossGen.

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:56:40Z

test/Microsoft.NET.Publish.Tests/GivenThatWeWantToCacheAProjectWithDependencies.cs

+
+
+            cacheDirectory.Should().HaveFiles(files_on_disk);
+


nit: more extra whitespace

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T17:57:08Z

test/Microsoft.NET.TestFramework/Commands/ComposeCache.cs


-        public ComposeCache(MSBuildTest msbuild, string projectPath)
-            : base(msbuild, projectPath)
+        public ComposeCache(MSBuildTest msbuild, string projectPath, string relativePathToProject= null)


nit: missing space before =

ramarag · 2017-02-23T22:15:11Z

@nguerrera i think i have fixed most of your concerns

nguerrera · 2017-02-23T22:49:47Z

Waiting to understand if there's not a way to get rid of the manual split. "Outdated" thread: #890 (comment)

eerhardt · 2017-02-23T23:39:55Z

        return Path.Combine(configuration, arch, targetFramework, PublishSubfolderName);

Why are we not putting the full RID in the output directory? This would better align with "build" and "publish".

Using Docker, I can easily spin up multiple types of machines (OSX, Ubuntu, etc) and use the same repo. I think we need to put the full RID in the output path.

Refers to: test/Microsoft.NET.TestFramework/Commands/ComposeCache.cs:51 in b2149b6. [](commit_id = b2149b6, deletion_comment = False)

eerhardt · 2017-02-23T23:42:33Z

test/Microsoft.NET.Publish.Tests/Microsoft.NET.Publish.Tests.csproj

    </PackageReference>
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
+    <Compile Include="$(RepositoryRootDirectory)src\Tasks\Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks\PackageInfo.cs" Exclude="$(GlobalExclude)" />


I don't think we should be doing this.

We have 2 types of tests: unit and integration.

Unit tests can/should test each class in isolation and mock out things. Put those tests in the UnitTests project under https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/tree/master/src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks.UnitTests.

Integration tests should have 0 knowledge of the inner workings of the code. This test project is an integration test. It should only be doing things that users would see/interact with.

The logic is used to verify the output of the integration test. I can duplicate the logic, but @dsplaisted was ok with using this to build test.

IMO - you should be baselining the file. It is easier to view the differences/changes when tests start to fail. You can see exactly what changed.

eerhardt · 2017-02-23T23:56:44Z

test/Microsoft.NET.Publish.Tests/GivenThatWeWantToCacheAProjectWithDependencies.cs

    public class GivenThatWeWantToCacheAProjectWithDependencies : SdkTest
    {
+        private static string libPrefix;
+        private static string runtimeos;


All these field names should conform to our coding standards. See https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/blob/master/Documentation/coding-guidelines/coding-style.md

eerhardt · 2017-02-23T23:58:41Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PackageInfo.cs

+
+        public bool Equals(PackageInfo pkg)
+        {
+            return Name.Equals(pkg.Name) && Version.Equals(pkg.Version);


I think you want case-insensitive comparison here for Name. NuGet package ids are case-insensitive.

eerhardt · 2017-02-24T00:00:04Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PackageInfo.cs

+
+namespace Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks
+{
+    internal class PackageInfo : IEquatable<PackageInfo>


I think we should use https://github.com/NuGet/NuGet.Client/blob/4cccb13833ad29d6a0bcff055460d964f1b49cfe/src/NuGet.Core/NuGet.Packaging.Core.Types/PackageIdentity.cs#L13 instead of making our own class. PackageIdentiy from NuGet already has all the correct semantics built into it.

eerhardt · 2017-02-24T00:02:12Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PublishAssembliesResolver.cs

 {
    public class PublishAssembliesResolver
    {
+        private static ConcurrentDictionary<PackageInfo, byte> _allResolvedPackages = new ConcurrentDictionary<PackageInfo, byte>();


This is a bad idea. We should not be using a static anything here for communication between Tasks.

eerhardt · 2017-02-28T16:02:33Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/CacheArtifactParser.cs

+using NuGet.Versioning;
+using NuGet.Packaging.Core;
+
+#if PRODUCT


I really don't think we should be reusing this code file in our tests. It is making the product code messier than it has to be.

The tests can just baseline the xml file and compare the result against the baseline. Or even use very simple Xml logic to ensure the file is correct.

This logic would need to be duplicated in test sources, there is no other way out.
I believe this is the lesser of the evils

I disagree. This is putting extra constraints on our product code that don't need to be there. For example these #ifs are unnecessary. If we want to add more logic to this file, we will have to continue adding these #ifs.

I still think baselining a couple xml files is the correct way for the tests to verify the output xml file is correct. It makes it super easy to see what has changed in the file when it has changed. And it catches things like when unexpected elements start showing up in the file.

In reply to: 103600599 [](ancestors = 103600599)

It is not as trivial as that, the contents of the file are going to differ across platforms and we will end up with multiple such files and make the test fragile. Logic like

sdk/test/Microsoft.NET.Publish.Tests/GivenThatWeWantToCacheAProjectWithDependencies.cs

Line 156 in b3ee71d

if (!RuntimeInformation.IsOSPlatform(OSPlatform.Windows) && arch != "x86")

would need to be written

If it becomes unbearable we should just fork the logic at that point

eerhardt · 2017-02-28T16:06:01Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/CacheArtifactParser.cs

+
+namespace Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks
+{
+    //<!-- The following provides the logic to parse the output - artifact.xml -->


I think you misunderstood my previous ask.

In C#, class summary comments should look like the following:

/// <summary> /// Represents a single diagnostic message, such as a compilation error or a project.json parsing error. /// </summary> internal class DiagnosticMessage

eerhardt · 2017-02-28T18:02:49Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/PublishAssembliesResolver.cs

            return results;
        }

+        public IEnumerable<PackageIdentity> GetResolvedpackages()


(nit) capitalization.

eerhardt · 2017-02-28T18:04:54Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.Publish.targets

-
+
+    <ItemGroup>
+      <ResolvedPackagesPublished Include="@(PackagesThatWhereResolved)"


(nit) Where should be Were

eerhardt · 2017-02-28T18:11:04Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets

+          DependsOnTargets="CacheWorkerMain;
+                            _CopyResolvedOptimizedFiles">
+
+    <RemoveDuplicates


From MSDN: "This task is case insensitive and does not compare item metadata when determining duplicates."

So what happens if we have multiple packages with the same ID but different versions? Will they get de-duped? Thus only 1 wins?

great catch, will remove this logic for now. As i am handling duplicates when consuming them

spoke too soon, have fixed this with RemoveDuplicatePackageReferences

eerhardt · 2017-02-28T18:38:37Z

             ResourceName="RuntimeIdentifierMustBeSetForNETFramework"/>

This resource doesn't exist in the .resx file.

When I try to run

dotnet cache --entries CacheStuff.csproj

I am getting the following error:

F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018: The "NETSdkError" task failed unexpectedly.\r [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]
F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018: System.ArgumentNullException: Value cannot be null.\r [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]
F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018: Parameter name: format\r [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]
F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018:    at System.String.FormatHelper(IFormatProvider provider, String format, ParamsArray args)\r [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]
F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018:    at System.String.Format(IFormatProvider provider, String format, Object[] args)\r [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]
F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018:    at Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks.NETSdkError.ExecuteCore()\r [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]
F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018:    at Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks.TaskBase.Execute()\r [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]
F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018:    at Microsoft.Build.BackEnd.TaskExecutionHost.Microsoft.Build.BackEnd.ITaskExecutionHost.Execute()\r [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]
F:\sdk\bin\Debug\Sdks\Microsoft.NET.Sdk\build\Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets(202,5): error MSB4018:    at Microsoft.Build.BackEnd.TaskBuilder.<ExecuteInstantiatedTask>d__25.MoveNext() [F:\DotNetTest\CacheStuff\CacheStuff.csproj]

Refers to: src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets:203 in 67adb10. [](commit_id = 67adb10, deletion_comment = False)

ramarag · 2017-02-28T21:19:38Z

in response to #890 (comment)

@nguerrera removed it in 75744ed
will add it back

ramarag · 2017-03-01T03:07:54Z

@nguerrera and @eerhardt i believe i have addressed all your concerns

eerhardt · 2017-03-01T16:51:28Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/RemoveDuplicatePackageReferences.cs

+namespace Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks
+{
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Resolves the assemblies to be published for a .NET app.


This comment seems like it was a copy-paste leftover.

argh.. should stop doing this, will fix

eerhardt · 2017-03-01T16:53:32Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/RemoveDuplicatePackageReferences.cs

+
+        protected override void ExecuteCore()
+        {
+            var listofPackages = new HashSet<PackageIdentity>();


listofPackages is misleading since it is a hash set. Simply packages would work, I think.

changed it to set

eerhardt · 2017-03-01T16:58:09Z

             ResourceName="RuntimeIdentifierMustBeSetForNETFramework"/>

This error message doesn't make sense for this error:

RuntimeIdentifier must be set for .NETFramework executables. Consider RuntimeIdentifier=win7-x86 or RuntimeIdentifier=win7-x64.

That error message is strictly for desktop framework .exes. Here we are dealing with .NET Core, and this has nothing to do with .exes.

Refers to: src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets:201 in fb8836f. [](commit_id = fb8836f, deletion_comment = False)

eerhardt · 2017-03-01T17:10:26Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.CrossGen.targets

+    <PropertyGroup>
+      <PathSeparator>$([System.IO.Path]::PathSeparator)</PathSeparator>
+      <DirectorySeparatorChar>$([System.IO.Path]::DirectorySeparatorChar)</DirectorySeparatorChar>
+      <TEMP Condition="'$(TEMP)' == ''">$([System.IO.Path]::GetTempPath())</TEMP>


Is this property used? I don't see where it is being used.

It is used in the compose phase, will move it there

eerhardt · 2017-03-01T17:17:02Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/build/Microsoft.NET.ComposeCache.targets

+     <_CacheArtifactContent>
+      <![CDATA[
+<CacheArtifacts>
+  <ItemGroup>


I don't think we need <ItemGroup> in this xml file. That is a hold over from using MSBuild.

i will keep this for now. as it will also lead to an extensible format, if we want to add anything more for cache.

It doesn't make any sense for it to be named ItemGroup.

Also, XML is already extensible. You can add any other <Element> you want without having things nested inside collection elements.

As a shepherd of the MSBuild file format: don't use ItemGroup. It's a bad name even for MSBuild.

ok will get rid of it, yes if we need to extend we can add some other element

eerhardt · 2017-03-01T17:21:26Z

Just a few last things to clean up, and then I'll sign off.

ramarag · 2017-03-01T23:19:24Z

In reply to #890 (comment)

changed the message

ramarag · 2017-03-01T23:28:10Z

@nguerrera @eerhardt any other concerns ?

nguerrera · 2017-03-02T18:06:01Z

TestAssets/TestProjects/FilterProfiles/NewtonsoftMultipleVersions.xml

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+<CacheArtifacts>
+  <PackageReference Include="Newtonsoft.Json" Version="9.0.1" />
+  <PackageReference Include="Newtonsoft.Json" Version ="9.0.2-beta2"/>


I don't like Include here since that is an msbuild concept, I think we should make it even more obvious that this is its own format, separate from csproj package references.

This is my suggestion:

<CacheArtifacts> <Package Id="NewtonSoft.Json" Version="9.0.1" /> </CacheArtifacts>

I don't want to start doing something different just because we can.
I would stick to conventions as much as possible

We talked offline, the problem with using any msbuild conventions is that it suggests other msbuild idioms might be possible. e.g. Can I use Remove? Exclude? Put common versions in props? etc.

@nguerrera changed them

nguerrera · 2017-03-02T18:09:20Z

src/Tasks/Microsoft.NET.Build.Tasks/CacheArtifactParser.cs

+            {
+                throw new BuildErrorException(Strings.IncorrectFilterFormat, filterFile);
+            }
+#endif


I strongly disklike the ifdef precedent, it leads to spaghetti every time. You can leave it for now, though, and I'll look at fixing it by enabling IVTA from tests (#656)

nguerrera · 2017-03-02T18:10:34Z

I have just the one remaining concern about the file format left.

- This allows for multiple versions of same package to be specified Parallelizing restore and crossgen operations Publish filter consumes the artifact produced by cache Removing temp copies during cache

ramarag · 2017-03-03T03:25:32Z

@nguerrera @eerhardt thanks for your inputs

Update the branding to rc1

dnfclas added the cla-already-signed label Feb 19, 2017

ramarag force-pushed the cache_artifact branch 3 times, most recently from d4d70e3 to 2403554 Compare February 19, 2017 09:55

ramarag commented Feb 20, 2017

View reviewed changes

ramarag commented Feb 21, 2017

View reviewed changes

ramarag force-pushed the cache_artifact branch 4 times, most recently from 610ee2d to f46dfc0 Compare February 22, 2017 08:13

gkhanna79 reviewed Feb 22, 2017

View reviewed changes

ramarag force-pushed the cache_artifact branch 3 times, most recently from 528aee5 to 8d4abd4 Compare February 23, 2017 07:11

nguerrera suggested changes Feb 23, 2017

View reviewed changes

ramarag force-pushed the cache_artifact branch from 8d4abd4 to b2149b6 Compare February 23, 2017 22:14

eerhardt reviewed Feb 23, 2017

View reviewed changes

eerhardt reviewed Feb 24, 2017

View reviewed changes

eerhardt reviewed Feb 28, 2017

View reviewed changes

ramarag force-pushed the cache_artifact branch from 67adb10 to fb8836f Compare March 1, 2017 02:39

eerhardt reviewed Mar 1, 2017

View reviewed changes

ramarag force-pushed the cache_artifact branch from fb8836f to f1f3785 Compare March 1, 2017 23:15

eerhardt approved these changes Mar 2, 2017

View reviewed changes

nguerrera reviewed Mar 2, 2017

View reviewed changes

ramarag force-pushed the cache_artifact branch from f1f3785 to 98daf0c Compare March 3, 2017 01:59

ramarag added 2 commits March 2, 2017 18:03

Resolving each package specified for Caching individually

59ae491

- This allows for multiple versions of same package to be specified Parallelizing restore and crossgen operations Publish filter consumes the artifact produced by cache Removing temp copies during cache

test modifications for compose cache and publish profile

bc4a5d5

ramarag force-pushed the cache_artifact branch from 98daf0c to bc4a5d5 Compare March 3, 2017 02:03

nguerrera approved these changes Mar 3, 2017

View reviewed changes

ramarag merged commit 6e8935b into dotnet:master Mar 3, 2017

mmitche pushed a commit to mmitche/sdk that referenced this pull request Jun 5, 2020

Merge pull request dotnet#890 from aspnet/vramak/UpdateToRc1Branding

9131203

Update the branding to rc1


		foreach (var pkginfo in doc.Elements("Project").Elements("ItemGroup").Elements("PackageReference"))
		{



		<ItemGroup>
		<ResolvedPackagesPublished Include="@(PackagesThatWhereResolved)"

Creating Cache Artifact #890

Creating Cache Artifact #890

Uh oh!

Conversation

ramarag commented Feb 19, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ramarag commented Feb 21, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ramarag commented Feb 23, 2017

Uh oh!

nguerrera commented Feb 23, 2017

Uh oh!

eerhardt commented Feb 23, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ramarag commented Feb 19, 2017 •

edited

Loading