NightOwl888 commented on issue #699:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/issues/699#issuecomment-1282896648

   For class libraries, the lower the version of the dependency we support, the 
lower the chance that users will run into conflicts. Keep in mind, unless it is 
specified otherwise it is the *minimum version* we target that users can 
upgrade. We targeted 1.1.2 for `net45` because it was the highest version that 
is compatible with `net45`. But most consumers were on a higher version of .NET 
Framework, so they could upgrade beyond that. Now that we have bumped the 
minimum version to `net462` we have more options.
   
   Looking at the options, 3.1.0 is the lowest version that is both supported 
and targets `System.Text.Json`, so that would give the widest support for 
consumers while getting us out of a conflict scenario with 
`Lucene.Net.Replicator`.
   
   6.0.0 is under consideration. But when we first added the dependency on 
`Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Abstractions`, we targeted the latest at 
the time (5.x) and had complaints from users that couldn't upgrade to that 
version due to conflicts with other libraries.
   
   We don't depend directly on `Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Json` in 
Lucene.Net, it is just something the test framework uses to be configurable via 
JSON files (we use it as a replacement for Java system properties). By 
injecting configuration, it can be used to do things like turn on assertions in 
all of Lucene.NET, control options in the test framework or directory locations 
to search for analyzer dictionaries. Ideally, the test framework should be on 
6.0.0 but we should target a lower version of 
`Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Abstractions` in `Lucene.Net` to avoid 
conflicts for the majority of users. If we target too high of a version, the 
result will be some people will target an older version of Lucene.NET.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to