GitVersion VS NUKE

Gitversion: It reads your commit history and generates a semver version out of it. Say you are compiling main branch and have a tag 1.0. Then, you squash 3 PRs. When you build this version, the new version number will be 1.0.3. You can configure it to be smarter about increasing major, minor, patch fields. I typically use prefix on the commit messages so that it generates versions correctly. See more at https://gitversion.net/docs/

GitVersion is not available by default and needs to be installed beforehand if we want to use the features it offers. The action is available here.

Check this out https://gitversion.net/docs/

At work we use https://gitversion.net/docs/ in our devops pipelines. Similaf to git-semver it generates a version based on what's published previously.

Under Linux I use gitflow and gitversion. The former helps me with branch and tags management, the latter keep tracks of the semantic version in a semi-automatic fashion (given a branch/commit/tag it generate a semver automatically based on the repo log). Gitflow should be supported by GUI tools too, but I'm more a CLI guy.

I’m not sure about in Bitbucket, but our pipeline has installed GitVersion which ups the build version based on SemVer. https://gitversion.net/docs/ We have a HealthCheck endpoint to return this version.

I know that GitVersion exists, which I think can automatically calculate the version number for me. But it's not entirely clear to me that it will do this. Also it doesn't seem to have a nbgv set-version equivalent that will just create a tag based on the calculated version number.

Kind of like you mention though, I tend to still create a build script using gitversion then just have the GitHub Action kick off the script. I find value in being able to create artifacts on a developer machine so having a simple script to run makes that as painless as possible and when I last looked a year or so ago there wasn't a good way of running GitHub Actions on your development machine.

Self promotion: I made Verlite for this purpose, tho something like GitVersion might be more suitable for your workflow.

Is it similar to Nuke?

Another thing I could recommend is to use something like Nuke build system to automate more complex tasks that aren't good fit for csproj using C# code (for example - publishing and zipping self-contained release of some service for specific platform using current date and time or commit hash as version number).

testcontainers and https://github.com/dotnet/Docker.DotNet are on my to-do list to try out, but just like with something like https://nuke.build/ i can't see the value other than that the config would be c# instead of some flavour of yaml.

We started using https://nuke.build/. Early days so can’t comment too much but it seems good so far.

I think you're giving a really bad example of what consumers should expect from open-source projects. This year I reworked the whole website, released several versions, did a huge chunk of development, and spoke at 5 events (with travel). This is the first significant gap in almost 6 years of continuous development. Maybe it's hard to imagine, but also maintainers sometimes face severe issues in their life. Comments like this don't make it any better.

Posting this here because I think only .NET people use Nuke (https://nuke.build/) to manage their build.