-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
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
APIs out of scope in CoreFX - 'CoreFXExtensions' repo? #22228
Comments
For graphs someone should probably take QuickGraph from CodePlex and make it work well on .NET Core (I assume it doesn't, it wasn't updated for quite some time). Though it's questionable if this has anything to do with corefx or corefxextensions. |
@karelz I am not sure if such issues is actionable. I would suggest to have a doc in corefx having such information and if anyone want to bring any library to corefx or corefxextensions should open a separate issue for such request. the document can have the information about the requirements for what can goes to corefx and what can go to corefxextensions. having issue like this will be very hard to track what need to be done and will include a lot of discussion for different types which will be confusing and not effective. |
@tarekgh this is master issue to dupe others against. I will manage the discussion here. It is IMO better to have a place for discussion than one-way doc info where no one can ask. This is the forming start of the overall "what belongs where" doc. If you are worried about this approach, let's chat. |
My worries is regarding the discussions will be related to different libraries. For example, we should have a separate issue for PowerCollections to decide about this library. if we use this issue to discuss all proposed libraries that will be very messy and not focused. |
I agree. I think it would be useful to have an explicit tag to label discussions with ( This would allow users to clearly see that the issue is not going to get merged into CoreFX, but it seems like a reasonable thing that could exist in the other library The issue can then be closed and moved to the CoreFXExtensions repo. Users can continue discussion, including whether or not they feel it is something that should be in CoreFX proper in the new thread. |
@tarekgh see my original top-post:
In general I am against creating new labels. It just creates mess based on my experience, unless there is strong driving force behind it. |
why we need to track these differently than any other requests like introducing a new APIs or porting some existing APIs? |
Because they don't belong into CoreFX - that's information we're communicating by closing the issues. And there's no better place to track the list / announcement about the next steps in the space. |
QuickGraph was ported to https://github.com/pelikhan/quickgraph by original author @pelikhan. |
I am in 17/2D if you want to chat |
@karelz, what work to be done in corefx is this issue tracking? |
@stephentoub this is catch-all for things that do not belong into CoreFX, but we did not provide clear guidance where they belong yet ... it is in extension something our team owns (to make final decision and provide guidance). |
Over time we have identified bunch of useful APIs, which we think don't belong into CoreFX repo, because they are more advanced, or just don't fit.
Here's the list to keep track of them with common explanation & list which can be reused later if/when we (or community) creates something like CoreFXExtensions
PLEASE: If you want to argue that something is in scope of CoreFX, vs. not, please take the discussion into specific issue. I will delete such replies from this thread.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: