Hold the xunit-dotnet monorepo on 3.x until the test host is migrated - #112
Conversation
Renovate proposed xunit.v3 4.0.0 and xunit.runner.visualstudio 4.0.0 in #108. Both .NET test jobs failed, identically on CI and on a local Mac: Microsoft.Testing.Platform.MSBuild.targets(320,5): error : Testing with VSTest target is no longer supported by Microsoft.Testing.Platform on .NET 10 SDK and later. If you use dotnet test, you should opt-in to the new dotnet test experience. xunit.v3 4.0.0 depends on xunit.v3.mtp-v2 [4.0.0, 4.0.0], which pulls Microsoft.Testing.Platform 2.x, and MTP 2 drops the VSTest bridge on the .NET 10 SDK. So this is a test-host migration, not a version bump: the test project has to opt into the new `dotnet test`, and ci.yml's two .NET jobs both pass `--logger "console;verbosity=normal"`, which is VSTest syntax MTP does not accept. #111 has the full checklist. The ceiling is <4.0.0 rather than `enabled: false`, matching every other hold in this file - patches inside 3.x keep flowing and only the major is blocked. Without it the bot re-proposes v4 every Monday, which is the exact re-litigation the header of this file says the holds exist to prevent. This is the seventh hold, so the count in the header moves with it, and the tracking-issue list gains the migration-shaped entry. Verified with the validator the file's own comment calls for: npx --yes --package renovate -- renovate-config-validator .github/renovate.json5 INFO: Config validated successfully against 1 file(s) Verify.XunitV3 32.0.0 is unaffected and merged separately in #106 - both .NET test jobs passed on it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01DAVZSEbjCkr9sbumdMPKy2
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Advanced Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe Renovate configuration now documents seven deliberate holds, tracks the xunit-dotnet migration in issue 111, and prevents xunit.v3 and its Visual Studio runner from upgrading to version 4. Changesxunit Renovate hold
Priority: ⬇️ Low Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~5 minutes Change: Other Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to The Renovate hold safely prevents the incompatible xUnit v4 upgrade while allowing supported 3.x maintenance updates. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Records the refusal of #108 as a Renovate hold, so the bot stops re-proposing it every Monday.
What failed
xunit.v34.0.0 andxunit.runner.visualstudio4.0.0 failed both .NET test jobs, identically on CI and on a local Mac:xunit.v34.0.0 depends onxunit.v3.mtp-v2 [4.0.0, 4.0.0], which pulls Microsoft.Testing.Platform 2.x. MTP 2 drops the VSTest bridge on the .NET 10 SDK, so the currentdotnet testinvocation has nowhere to run.That makes this a test-host migration rather than a version bump. The work is tracked in #111: opt the project into the new
dotnet test, and replace the VSTest-only--logger "console;verbosity=normal"that both .NET jobs inci.ymlpass.The rule
Ceiling is
<4.0.0, notenabled: false, matching every other hold in the file - patches inside 3.x keep flowing and only the major is blocked. The rule carries its reason and points at #111, so the refusal travels attached to the next proposal instead of being re-derived.Also updated: the header's hold count (six to seven) and the tracking-issue list in the
packageRulescomment block.Verification
Ran the validator the file's own comment calls for, given that an unparseable config makes Renovate do nothing silently:
Not affected
Verify.XunitV332.0.0 is a separate package and merged cleanly in #106 - both .NET test jobs passed on it. The Verify grouping rule above this one is untouched.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01DAVZSEbjCkr9sbumdMPKy2
Summary by CodeRabbit