Remove manual ref-assembly generation for Router

[rynowak]

No description provided.

[rynowak]

We need to review this really carefully to make sure something else doesn't regress.

[javiercn]

I'm gonna say 👍 but I'm not really sure what's going on here. I imagine its likely the ref assembly for components have the wrong stuff and hence the issue?

[dougbu]

As long as removing the private setters from the ref properties is fine (and I seem to remember comments to that effect in other PRs), this looks solid. (Side-by-side comparison turns up only the removal of the private setters and one property placement correction.)

[rynowak]

As long as removing the private setters from the ref properties is fine (and I seem to remember comments to that effect in other PRs), this looks solid. (Side-by-side comparison turns up only the removal of the private setters and one property placement correction.)

Nope. Super not-fine - I'm glad you noticed.

[rynowak]

I'm gonna say 👍 but I'm not really sure what's going on here. I imagine its likely the ref assembly for components have the wrong stuff and hence the issu

Our choices pre-mondo-ization led us to need these manually maintained ref assemblies and it's been a nightmare to manage. When they get out of sync with the product we only know because of failing template tests.

We're at a point now where we can remove all of this garbage.

[SteveSandersonMS]

As long as removing the private setters from the ref properties is fine (and I seem to remember comments to that effect in other PRs), this looks solid. (Side-by-side comparison turns up only the removal of the private setters and one property placement correction.)

Nope. Super not-fine - I'm glad you noticed.

Let's figure out a strategy for this first then. I see this is where we decided to require public setters. If it's at all possible not to require public setters that would be a huge benefit.

If we did require public setters, we'd have to put them on all the built-in components, which:

• Forces us to design a lot more behavior and more tests to deal with people using the setters manually. The built-in components aren't designed for that currently.
• Locks us into having these public setters forever.

[SteveSandersonMS]

If we did require public setters, we'd have to put them on all the built-in components, which:

OK, forget that comment. This is something we've thought through already and decided is the right choice. We're using an analyzer to warn people not to call those setters, so we don't regard it as supported to do so.

[rynowak]

Updated to use public get/public set