Skip to content

fix: build Report timing via the 0.18.1 constructor (net6/net7 MissingMethodException) - #255

Merged
Chris-Wolfgang merged 1 commit into
vNextfrom
fix/report-timing-ctor
Jul 28, 2026
Merged

fix: build Report timing via the 0.18.1 constructor (net6/net7 MissingMethodException)#255
Chris-Wolfgang merged 1 commit into
vNextfrom
fix/report-timing-ctor

Conversation

@Chris-Wolfgang

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Into vNext for 0.11.0 — fixes the Stage 1 / net6.0 failure on #254.

Problem

The doubles surfaced Report timing via the object-initializer (init) form. On .NET 6/7, a consumer loads TestKit's netstandard2.0 assembly but resolves Abstractions' modern assembly at runtime, so the init setter's IsExternalInit modreq didn't match → MissingMethodException: Report.set_StartedAt. (net462/net8/net10 matched, so they were green.)

Fix

  • The 6 doubles build their Report via the new Report(int, DateTimeOffset?, TimeSpan, int?) constructor (Abstractions 0.18.1) instead of the initializer. A plain ctor has no modreq, so its signature is identical on every TFM. Behavior is unchanged (same values, same validation).
  • Bumped the Wolfgang.Etl.Abstractions reference 0.18.0 → 0.18.1.

Verified

Clean restore against the published NuGet 0.18.1: the previously-failing net6.0 suite passes 194/194 (was 175 pass / 19 fail).

Once merged, #254's net6.0 stage goes green.

…gMethodException)

The doubles surfaced Report.StartedAt/Elapsed/TotalItemCount via the object-initializer
(init) form. On .NET 6/7 a consumer loads TestKit's netstandard2.0 assembly but resolves
Abstractions' modern assembly at runtime, so the init-setter IsExternalInit modreq did not
match -> MissingMethodException. Use the plain Report(int, DateTimeOffset?, TimeSpan, int?)
constructor added in Abstractions 0.18.1, whose signature is identical across every TFM.
Bump the Abstractions reference 0.18.0 -> 0.18.1.

Verified: the previously-failing net6.0 tests pass against Abstractions 0.18.1.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings July 28, 2026 00:41

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants