feat: Update Target Framework to include net10.0

[askpt]

Signed-off-by: André Silva [email protected]

This PR

This pull request updates the target frameworks for both the main OpenFeature.Contrib.Providers.Flagd library and its related test projects. The primary goal is to add support for newer .NET versions, ensuring compatibility with future .NET releases, while maintaining backward compatibility with older frameworks.

Target framework updates:

• Updated the main project (OpenFeature.Contrib.Providers.Flagd.csproj) to target netstandard2.0, net462, net8.0, net9.0, and net10.0, expanding compatibility across multiple .NET versions.
• Modified the test projects (OpenFeature.Contrib.Providers.Flagd.E2e.Common.csproj and OpenFeature.Contrib.Providers.Flagd.Test.csproj) to target net8.0, net9.0, and net10.0 by default, and conditionally include net462 when running on Windows, ensuring tests can run across both legacy and latest .NET environments. [1] [2]

Related Issues

Fixes #510

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @askpt, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the OpenFeature.Contrib.Providers.Flagd library and its associated test projects by updating their target frameworks. This change ensures the projects can leverage the latest features and improvements of the .NET ecosystem, while maintaining necessary support for older versions, particularly for Windows-specific testing scenarios.

Highlights

• Target Framework Update: The core OpenFeature.Contrib.Providers.Flagd project now includes net10.0 in its target frameworks, expanding its compatibility.
• Test Project Frameworks: Both end-to-end and unit test projects (OpenFeature.Contrib.Providers.Flagd.E2e.Common and OpenFeature.Contrib.Providers.Flagd.Test) have been updated to target net8.0, net9.0, and net10.0, with net462 conditionally added for Windows platforms to ensure comprehensive testing.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request updates the target frameworks for the projects to include .NET 10.0, and also adds multi-targeting for several other frameworks like .NET 9.0, .NET 8.0, and .NET 4.62. The changes in the project files are mostly correct, but I've suggested a more robust way to conditionally define the target frameworks in the test projects to improve maintainability.