Skip to content

Update dead url - #6809

Merged
dkurepa merged 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom
dkurepa:dkurepa/UpdateDeadUrl
Oct 22, 2026
Merged

dkurepa merged 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom
dkurepa:dkurepa/UpdateDeadUrl

Conversation

@dkurepa

@dkurepa dkurepa commented Oct 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Copilot AI balanced review requested due to automatic review settings October 22, 2026 13:29
@dkurepa
dkurepa enabled auto-merge (squash) October 22, 2026 13:31

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🟢 Approval recommended

The documentation-only changes introduce no identified blocking issues and preserve explicit approval requirements for pin corrections and builds.

No open issues 🎉

What changed in this PR

This PR updates an internal documentation link and expands servicing CQB guidance for recovering dependency pins when runtime no longer produces a package.

Changes:

  • Replaces the outdated Application Insights wiki URL and clarifies the link text.
  • Documents how to identify verified released package producers and recommend pin corrections while preserving explicit approval requirements.
File Description
eng/​service-templates/​readme.md Updates the Application Insights overview link.
.github/​skills/​dotnet-servicing-cqb-status/​SKILL.md Adds discontinued-package recovery steps, recommended actions, and reporting requirements.

Review effort: Balanced

@dkurepa
dkurepa merged commit 50b8f69 into dotnet:main Oct 22, 2026
3 of 11 checks passed
- A direct `runtime -> aspnetcore` PR alone does not complete aspnetcore when the graph also requires `efcore -> aspnetcore`. Wait for a successful aspnetcore build containing both parent flows.
- Do not hide incoherence behind a newer green CI run.

#### Recover pins for packages no longer produced

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Curious if this skill change was intentional and why it was included with updating the PR?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it was yes, I was just a bit lazy and included it here instead of creating it's own PR

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants