add slnx support

[kasperk81]

Prerequisites

• I have written a descriptive issue title
• I have searched issues to ensure it has not already been reported

Cake runner

Cake .NET Tool

Cake version

latest

Operating system

N/A

Operating system architecture

N/A

CI Server

No response

What are you seeing?

slnx is an XML SLN format.
.net9 added slnx support dotnet new sln -f slnx and latest VS opens and builds such solution.

src/Cake.Common/Tools/DotNet/Sln is missing slnx.

What is expected?

slnx parsing and serialization using the same library dotnet-sdk is using https://github.com/microsoft/vs-solutionpersistence.

Steps to Reproduce

N/A

Output log

No response

[nathanES]

Hi!
I'd love to work on this issue as my first contribution to Cake (and to open source in general)

From what I understand, the goal here is to implement parsing and serializing support for .slnx files using https://github.com/microsoft/vs-solutionpersistence. Before I get started, could you clarify where this functionality would be used within Cake ?

Currently, dotnet sln add/list/remove commands are invoked directly via the CLI, so i'm not sure where parsing and serialization would come into play. Is this intended for a future feature, or is there an existing use case I might be missing ?

Thanks in advance

[saadbakhshi]

Is this issue resolved? Correct me if I am wrong but I do not see any issues using .slnx.

[kasperk81]

#4521 is the pull request. it will make slnx first-class citizen of cake

[nadais]

With .NET 10 now being out with full slnx support, could we make sure this feature gets in sooner?

This would be especially useful for projects using cake who want to modernize their solution files

That PR also seems to be open for 5 months with the user not signing the contribution agreement. What could be next steps on this?

[gep13]

@nadais said...
That PR also seems to be open for 5 months with the user not signing the contribution agreement. What could be next steps on this?

Without a signed CLA, we will not be able to pull in the changes in that PR.

As a project, we are reluctant to pull in a 3rd party dependency, unless it is truly needed.

As a project, we would look to provide minimal slnx parsing, similar to what we do with sln files, but if additional parsing was required, it would be best to have this implemented within an addin, similar to what was provided in the Cake.Incubator project.

Or, depending on what the exact requirements are, use the 3rd party assembly directly in your build scripts.

@nadais can you perhaps provide some information about the use cases that you have for parsing slnx files? That might help to guide the conversation on exactly what is required. Thanks!

[MustafaNisar2002]

Is this still open?
I would like to contribute

[gep13]

@MustafaNisar2002 said...
Is this still open?

Have you read the comment above your one?

Yes, this issue is still open, but there is some discussion that would need to be answered before we could decide the correct path forward. I am still leaning towards this becoming a Cake Addin, rather than "in the box", especially if it means taking a new 3rd party dependency.

[Nysosis]

Given that the schema for the slnx is very minimal, I would think it could be parsed simply without bringing in the 3rd party parser (even though it's MSofts), a simple XPath or two should be able to identify all the Project nodes out of it:

//Project[@Path]

or

/Solution/Project[@Path]
and
/Solution/Folder/Project[@Path]

I am on camp - 'in the box' on this though - as the origin .sln parsing is part of core cake, feels like .slnx should be out the box too as it's a core format for solution files, and not some 3rd party propriatry format

[gep13]

@Nysosis said...
I am on camp - 'in the box' on this though - as the origin .sln parsing is part of core cake, feels like .slnx should be out the box too as it's a core format for solution files, and not some 3rd party propriatry format

To be clear, I am not against it being "in the box", but not at the expense of pulling in a 3rd party dependency.

[kasperk81]

this dependency is used by .net sdk, msbuild, visual studio, vscode and other products. i'm not sure if it's a third or second party in this context, but it certainly isn't "yet another 3p dep"!

[gep13]

It is a dependency that we don't have control over, and as a result, we want to limit exposure of these in Cake.

The current solution parsing for .sln files within Cake is done without the need for a dependency, so we would look to provide the same for .slnx, without the dependency, and instead, look towards a Cake Addin to provide full support using this 3rd party assembly.

[patriksvensson]

Who else uses it doesn't change anything.

We have a policy to ensure that core and common parts does not have any third party dependencies, and that has served us very well in the past when updating Cake i.e. from .NET framework -> .NET Core 1-rc,1,2,3 -> .NET, and I suspect this policy will serve us well in the future.