docs: add honest comparison table vs Google's official .NET packages#309
Merged
Conversation
🔬 TestGlance✅ 212 passed across 1 job — 100.0% · ⏱️ 2.1s
🟡 build — details✅ 212 passed vs
Updated 2026-06-16T07:24:19.425Z |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Upgrades the README's "Why this vs Google's official packages" section from a single prose paragraph into a scannable, honest comparison table.
Google ships official .NET packages for its newer gRPC APIs (
Google.Maps.Routing.V2,Google.Maps.Places.V1,Google.Maps.Geocode.V4, …), but for several classic REST web-service APIs (Distance Matrix, Elevation, Time Zone, Directions, Static Maps) there's no official .NET client at all. This section owns that comparison rather than hiding from it.Why
Most .NET devs would pick a friendlier wrapper if they knew it existed and how it compares. The section now makes that case with an at-a-glance table — and stays honest about where the official packages are the better choice.
Honesty notes
The comparison was grounded in research, which corrected two overclaims in the previous prose:
net462, so official packages reach .NET Framework too; the edge is marginal.Kept only defensible rows: no-official-client coverage, one-package-vs-per-API, lightweight deps vs the gRPC stack, stable 2.x vs several official Maps packages still in beta, DI/
IHttpClientFactory, and built-in OpenTelemetry. A closing "prefer the official packages when…" note covers gRPC streaming / Google Cloud integration / Google's support.Scope
Docs-only — no code, csproj, public-API, or changelog impact.