Relation between PrivateAssets=all and IncludeAssets / ExcludeAssets

[lonix1]

I created a discussion rather than issue as I'm unsure whether this is feasible. I originally asked this on SO.

The nuget installation pages for development-only packages (e.g. analysers, build tools), typically show this:

<PackageReference Include="Foo" Version="1.2.3">
  <PrivateAssets>all</PrivateAssets>
  <IncludeAssets>runtime;build;native;contentfiles;analyzers;...</IncludeAssets>
</PackageReference>

For such packages, the PrivateAssets property is always set to all. But the IncludeAssets property is always specified too. I was wondering whether it's redundant. I got a nice answer from @zivkan who explained it's necessary.

But he raised an interesting point, which is that it's neater to use <ExcludeAssets>compile</ExcludeAssets>, or even better: <PackageReference Include="Foo" Version="1.2.3" ExcludeAssets="compile" />.

I'd like to do that. I'm wondering whether there are possible problems with that?

And if it's "safe", how about using that format on the nuget pages, and simplifying everyone's project files?

[murshex]

I noticed this too, I agree with this

[lonix1]

I converted this to an issue, please follow there.

[nkolev92]

Copying my response from #13345 (comment).

Using ExcludeAssets technically could lead to a changed behavior if a new asset class was introduced, which now would get included because you're using exclude compile.

Can't think of anything else beyond that.
Related issue: #8098.