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

[Suggestion] Getting rid of PropertyGroup/ItemGroup #632

Closed
MaximRouiller opened this issue Oct 20, 2016 · 7 comments
Closed

[Suggestion] Getting rid of PropertyGroup/ItemGroup #632

MaximRouiller opened this issue Oct 20, 2016 · 7 comments

Comments

@MaximRouiller
Copy link

By @filipw:

How about a csproj without <PropertyGroup>, <ItemGroup>, the 2 default imports and an implicit <Compile Include="**\*.cs" />

<Project>
    <OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
    <TargetFramework>netcoreapp1.0</TargetFramework>

   <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.NETCore.App" Version="1.0.0" />
   <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.NET.SDK" Version="1.0.0" />
</Project>
@Mike-E-angelo
Copy link

@luisrudge
Copy link

next step: simple json to xml conversion :trollface:

@gulbanana
Copy link

without groups, how would the build system tell whether something was a property or an item if it was not repeated?

@srivatsn
Copy link
Contributor

This would need to be a msbuild feature. Please file the issue over at https://github.com/microsoft/msbuild

@MaximRouiller
Copy link
Author

@srivatsn Done. /cc @filipw

@MaximRouiller MaximRouiller changed the title [Suggestion] Getting rid of PropertGroup/ItemGroup [Suggestion] Getting rid of PropertyGroup/ItemGroup Oct 24, 2016
@333fred
Copy link
Member

333fred commented Oct 24, 2016

Closing as this has been ported to the appropriate repo.

@333fred 333fred closed this as completed Oct 24, 2016
@forki
Copy link

forki commented Nov 2, 2016

Does the same thing work for fsproj? Cc @KevinRansom

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

No branches or pull requests

7 participants