paulirwin commented on code in PR #1: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet-codeanalysis-dev/pull/1#discussion_r1990004571
########## src/Lucene.Net.CodeAnalysis.Dev/AnalyzerReleases.Unshipped.md: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ +### New Rules Review Comment: I'll work on the rest, but in regard to "It looks like you meant to use [Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.PublicApiAnalyzers](https://github.com/%5Bdotnet/roslyn-analyzers%5D(https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn-analyzers?tab=readme-ov-file#microsoftcodeanalysispublicapianalyzers)?tab=readme-ov-file#microsoftcodeanalysispublicapianalyzers)" - nope, Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers is a different package that provides meta-analyzers that make sure you're creating analyzers properly. That is a different package than PublicApiAnalyzers, which is for analyzing changes to your public APIs. Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers reads in these Markdown files and expects them to be in the specific format per the docs that you linked to. I do not think we need Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.PublicApiAnalyzers as this is not a public API per se like Roslyn analyzers are (per your example link). That could be useful on the main lucenenet project (including our public analyzers), though. Re: the docs, I think we should just link to those docs in the README, not copy the docs here. That way if they improve the docs or fix documentation bugs there, we don't have to keep our version in sync. -- 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: dev-unsubscr...@lucenenet.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
