Fix missing ContainerProperty attribute on dynamic properties (issue #380)

[stanb]

Issues

This pull request fixes issue #380 When entity is an open type (<EntityType Name="ResultObject" OpenType="true">) VS extension generates IDictionary<string, object> DynamicProperties property. This property must have ContainerProperty attribute. Otherwise, when connected service is used, the dictionary is not populated from response. If in the project, referenced Microsoft.OData.Client nuget with version >= 7.10.*, ContainerProperty attribute not added due to wrong versions comparison. If I reference Microsoft.OData.Client version 7.20.0, the ContainerProperty attribute not added because lexically 7.20.0 < 7.6.4

Description

Fix Microsoft.OData.Client versions comparison.

[stanb]

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

[wachugamaina]

Could you kindly share in the description what the issue is exactly and what the solution hopes to achieve?

[stanb]

@wachugamaina I hope this is enough.

[habbes]

@stanb thanks for this PR. Using lexical comparison was definitely a strange choice. Would you mind rebasing this PR with the master branch?

@gathogojr could you check why the pipeline is failing?

[stanb]

@habbes done

[gathogojr]

Hey @stanb. Your code change won't give you the outcome you expect. Microsoft.OData.Client version 7.6.4 didn't support the dynamic properties container property. Support was introduced in 7.7.* Take a look at the changelog here - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/odata/changelog/odatalib-7x#odatalib-770-beta-release It's the reason why the version was explicitly hard-coded. Your code would result into the dynamic properties container property being generated in the proxy but the logic to populate the dictionary with the materialized dynamic properties isn't available in 7.6.4 and lower versions of the library.

Change:

return Version.Parse(reference.Version) >= Version.Parse("7.6.4.0");

to

return Version.Parse(reference.Version) > Version.Parse("7.6.4.0");

[gathogojr]

@stanb thanks for this PR. Using lexical comparison was definitely a strange choice. Would you mind rebasing this PR with the master branch?

@gathogojr could you check why the pipeline is failing? A fix for the failures on the build pipeline had been merged.

@habbes The rebase is what was needed. It had

[stanb]

@gathogojr fixed