Skip to content

Commit 7e33f5d

Browse files
zlavclaude
andcommitted
[ANE-2523] integration test: bump ServiceStack expectation 64 → 92
ServiceStack v5.13.2 has 92 project files (91 .csproj + 1 .fsproj). The old expectation of 64 was the count of directories that contain at least one project file, which matched the pre-fix behavior of `find isPackageRefFile` returning only the first project file per directory. 19 directories hold 2-3 sibling csproj variants (src/ServiceStack/{ServiceStack, ServiceStack.Core, ServiceStack.Source}.csproj for .NET-Framework / .NET-Core / source-distribution targets), and the old code silently dropped the non-winners — that's the ANE-2523 bug. Discovery now emits one NuGetProject per project file, so the count grows accordingly. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
1 parent cf5af6f commit 7e33f5d

1 file changed

Lines changed: 10 additions & 1 deletion

File tree

integration-test/Analysis/NugetSpec.hs

Lines changed: 10 additions & 1 deletion
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -45,8 +45,17 @@ testServiceStackForPkgReferences :: Spec
4545
testServiceStackForPkgReferences =
4646
aroundAll (withAnalysisOf NonStrict $ serviceStack NuGet.discover) $ do
4747
describe "ServiceStack" $ do
48+
-- 92 = every project file under v5.13.2 (91 .csproj + 1
49+
-- .fsproj). The pre-ANE-2523 expectation was 64; that count
50+
-- was masking the bug — 19 directories hold 2-3 sibling csproj
51+
-- files (e.g. src/ServiceStack/{ServiceStack, ServiceStack.Core,
52+
-- ServiceStack.Source}.csproj for the .NET-Framework /
53+
-- .NET-Core / source-distribution variants), and the old
54+
-- `find isPackageRefFile` was picking only one alphabetically
55+
-- and silently dropping the rest. Discovery now emits one
56+
-- NuGetProject per project file.
4857
it "should find targets" $ \(result, _) -> do
49-
length result `shouldBe` 64
58+
length result `shouldBe` 92
5059

5160
testServiceStackForPkgConfig :: Spec
5261
testServiceStackForPkgConfig =

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)