aspnet-api-versioning VS FluentValidation

Here is a code example

- The DTOs on the server should generally not change without warning. A deprecation cycle should ideally be in place so consumers can keep up over time and front end development doesn't have to be lock-step with the services the consume. Ideally some period of time between service v1 being deprecated and service v2 being required to allow consumers to react ( in this case, you're the consumer, so be kind to yourself ). Deets: https://github.com/dotnet/aspnet-api-versioning

This API versioning can be parameterized with some options, including the default version or even how the versioning will be done, whether by URL, header or media type. For more details, you can access the official documentation.

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnet-api-versioning/tree/master/samples/aspnetcore/BasicSample/Controllers something like this

Could you not achieve what you want by using ASP.NET API versioning - there's a by namespace example here

A lista completa pode ser vista aqui: https://github.com/microsoft/aspnet-api-versioning/wiki/Version-Format

You don't have to use attributes. You can use conventions. See here.

This template was built using a variety of powerful frameworks and tools, including: .NET, Ngrok, JWT (JSON Web Tokens), Entity Framework, AutoMapper, FluentValidation, Flurl, Humanizer, libphonenumber-csharp, MailKit, OAuth, Serilog, Twilio, Swagger, React.js, React Native, React Navigation, Axios, Expo Dev, Lodash, NativeWind, React Hook Form, Zustand, Visual Studio Code, Visual Studio, Android Studio, Git, GitHub Copilot, Node.js, React Native Paper, NextUI

FluentValidation is undoubtedly the most popular third-party validation library on .NET. It is a robust choice if you need clean POCOs or multiple validation maps per type. However, its performance may surprise you.

Note There is no formal documentation for inline validation. See source code.

18. FluentValidation.AspNetCore

Here is an example of Command handler with built-in Fluent Validation and fire and forget style:

There is an RFC called Problem Details (RFC7807) that standardizes how an error in an API should be responded to for the client. If you use Fluent validation, you may have noticed that the response is within this pattern.

here we're defining the input validation requirements using fluent validation rules. let's see what happens when the user input doesn't meet the above criteria. execute the same request in swagger with the following incorrect json content:

I remember FluentValidation being a nice library for this type of stuff.

Literally the code example in the front page: https://fluentvalidation.net/