Do not require referenced projects to reference LeanCode.Contracts

[Saancreed]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Test Results

  2 files  ±0    2 suites  ±0   48s ⏱️ +4s
 82 tests ±0   82 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
178 runs  ±0  178 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit c2c0294. ± Comparison against base commit 8d17b9b.

[jakubfijalkowski]

Why are we changing this? This was deliberate previously - if you referenced LeanCode.Contracts with the wrong version, you had an error. Now, it will basically silently ignore the error.

[Saancreed]

It was a minor request from @tomaszlaskowskiLC that I experimentally checked how troublesome it would be to implement. The reason for doing this was to be able to reference projects that only contain simple type definitions: enums, maybe DTOs. Such projects have no reason to reference LeanCode.Contracts at all, because doing so would hurt their reusability in other places.

Of course, we can brand the entire practice as an anti-pattern and be done with it, but maybe I could offer a solution like "require types to be found if the compilation references LeanCode.Contracts" instead?

[jakubfijalkowski]

Such projects have no reason to reference LeanCode.Contracts at all, because doing so would hurt their reusability in other places.

This somewhat changes our initial assumptions. Contracts were contracts, and that's it. You were not supposed to reuse them arbitrarily. I get the purpose (i.e. use the same enum in both domain and contracts) but that is not how we were supposed to do things.

Let's put this back in the backlog and pause this PR.

[tomaszlaskowskiLC]

As mentioned, that was more of a side request. We're ok with adding LeanCode.Contracts as dependency to these projects in Welliba after updating to new version.

Anyway, @Saancreed, I tested it on the same project as before, and it works. 😛