Bug 571 - Migrator should upgrade csproj to VS2010 format
Summary: Migrator should upgrade csproj to VS2010 format
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 1382
Alias: None
Product: Xamarin Studio
Classification: Desktop
Component: iOS add-in ()
Version: Trunk
Hardware: PC Mac OS
: --- enhancement
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Alan McGovern
Depends on:
Reported: 2011-08-31 11:27 UTC by Alan McGovern
Modified: 2011-10-09 14:19 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Is this bug a regression?: ---
Last known good build:

Notice (2018-05-24): bugzilla.xamarin.com is now in read-only mode.

Please join us on Visual Studio Developer Community and in the Xamarin and Mono organizations on GitHub to continue tracking issues. Bugzilla will remain available for reference in read-only mode. We will continue to work on open Bugzilla bugs, copy them to the new locations as needed for follow-up, and add the new items under Related Links.

Our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed on this bug tracker over the years. Thanks also for your understanding as we make these adjustments and improvements for the future.

Please create a new report on Developer Community or GitHub with your current version information, steps to reproduce, and relevant error messages or log files if you are hitting an issue that looks similar to this resolved bug and you do not yet see a matching new report.

Related Links:

Description Alan McGovern 2011-08-31 11:27:54 UTC
After loading an old MD 2.6 project into MD 2.8, it automatically migrated to the new format. I added a Launch image from the plist editor and it prompted me to immediately upgrade to VS2010 format for the project. This should've already been done if it is required.
Comment 1 Mikayla Hutchinson [MSFT] 2011-08-31 11:38:34 UTC
That must have been a project that hadn't been modified in a long time. We've been requiring VS2010 format for quite a long time, and any implicit project save since then would have caused the format upgrade.
Comment 2 Mike Krüger 2011-09-06 02:19:02 UTC
I don't think that it's worth the time implementing that as 1 step.
Comment 3 Alan McGovern 2011-09-23 09:44:55 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 145 ***
Comment 4 Alan McGovern 2011-10-09 14:19:01 UTC
bug 145 is different.
Comment 5 Alan McGovern 2011-10-09 14:19:43 UTC
1382 has a project attached which repros the issue

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1382 ***