D:\a\1\s\src\System.Management.Automation\SourceGenerators\PSVersionInfoGenerator\PSVersionInfoGenerator.cs(14,18): warning RS1036: 'SMA.PSVersionInfoGenerator': A project containing analyzers or source generators should specify the property 'true' [D:\a\1\s\src\System.Management.Automation\SourceGenerators\PSVersionInfoGenerator\PSVersionInfoGenerator.csproj]

I guess this asks to add <EnforceExtendedAnalyzerRules>true</EnforceExtendedAnalyzerRules> in PSVersionInfoGenerator.csproj

D:\a\1\s\src\Microsoft.Management.UI.Internal\ShowCommand\Controls\ParameterSetControl.xaml.cs(164,112): error CS1501: No overload for method 'Create' takes 1 arguments [D:\a\1\s\src\Microsoft.Management.UI.Internal\Microsoft.PowerShell.GraphicalHost_l0ynpe1u_wpftmp.csproj]

Please fix.

This PR has 66 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Label      : Small
Size       : +31 -35
Percentile : 26.4%

Total files changed: 16

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +30 -35
.csproj : +1 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

Ilya (@iSazonov) Do we still need to fix something to merge this PR?

🎉v7.4.0-preview.2 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

• Release Notes