Combine --check and --dry-run into a single option.

[JoeRobich]

The use case for --check (CI Validation) also uses --dry-run. Use cases for --dry-run could ignore exit code if formatting changes are found.

Considers --check as the canonical flag and --dry-run as an alias.

[jmarolf]

I approve of this change. My only question is "should we bump the version number as this is a breaking change?"

[JoeRobich]

@jmarolf I plan to bump version numbers for each release. That being said. I should start doing it after a release...

[JoeRobich]

Version bump in this PR #543

[jmarolf]

Shouldn't this be a major version bump though?

[JoeRobich]

@jmarolf sure

[xt0rted]

I have a GitHub Action that wraps this tool (xt0rted/dotnet-format) and I'm about to release it but was wondering how this change will effect my usage of it first.

When linting I use --check --dry-run so I can let the user decide if the workflow should exit with an error or not, and when applying fixes I'm also using --check to know if the rest of the workflow should continue (committing & pushing changes back).

Now that --check and --dry-run have been merged is there a way for the caller to know if files were formatted? I guess I could add another step that uses git for this, but it'd be easier if the tool told me instead.

[JoeRobich]

Hi @xt0rted, Our understanding was that --check and --dry-run were used together basically 100% of the time for the purpose of linting (once users realized they needed to have both). I would recommend checking git for unstaged changes if you are relying on the old behavior of --check. Sorry again for the change.