SharpCorePDF.Application 1.0.0

<p align="center"> <img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/MPCoreDeveloper/SharpCorePDF/main/Logo.jpg" alt="SharpCorePDF" width="260" /> </p> <p align="center"> <a href="https://www.nuget.org/packages/SharpCorePDF"> <img src="https://img.shields.io/nuget/vpre/SharpCorePDF?label=nuget.org" alt="nuget.org version" /> </a> <a href="https://github.com/MPCoreDeveloper/SharpCorePDF/actions/workflows/ci.yml"> <img src="https://img.shields.io/github/actions/workflow/status/MPCoreDeveloper/SharpCorePDF/ci.yml?label=tests&logo=githubactions&logoColor=white" alt="tests" /> </a> <a href="https://sonarcloud.io/dashboard?id=MPCoreDeveloper_SharpCorePDF"> <img src="https://img.shields.io/sonar/quality_gate/MPCoreDeveloper_SharpCorePDF?server=https%3A%2F%2Fsonarcloud.io&logo=sonarcloud&logoColor=white" alt="SonarCloud quality gate" /> </a> <a href="https://github.com/MPCoreDeveloper/SharpCorePDF/blob/main/LICENSE"> <img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/licence-MIT-blue" alt="licence: MIT" /> </a> <a href="https://github.com/sponsors/MPCoreDeveloper"> <img src="https://img.shields.io/badge/Sponsor-%E2%9D%A4-ff69b4" alt="Sponsor" /> </a> </p>

SharpCorePDF

A dependency-injection first, domain-driven PDF library for .NET 10 and .NET 11, built around one capability done properly: merging PDF documents — whole documents, selected pages, in any order.

Every PDF byte is read and written by this library. There is no dependency on a third-party PDF engine, no native binary and no licence to accept: the reader, the writer and the merge engine are part of the package, and they are covered by tests against real-world documents and validated with independent implementations (qpdf via pikepdf, and pypdf).

What it does

using SharpCorePDF.Domain.Aggregates;
using SharpCorePDF.Domain.Ports;
using SharpCorePDF.Infrastructure.Extensions;

var plan = MergePlan.Create()
    .AddFile(@"C:\reports\summary.pdf")                // every page
    .AddFile(@"C:\reports\appendix.pdf", pages: "1-3") // one-based, "1,3-5,8-"
    .AddFile(@"C:\reports\annex.pdf", pages: "3,1");   // in this order

await merger.MergeToFileAsync(plan, @"C:\reports\combined.pdf");

• Page selections in the notation people write: 5, 2-7, 3-, -4, comma separated, in the order they are given. Page numbers are always one-based.

• Everything of every source travels with its pages: content streams, images, fonts, resources, annotations, bookmarks and form widgets. Stream bytes are copied verbatim — nothing is re-compressed.

• One flat page tree in the result, with the inheritable page attributes (Resources, MediaBox, CropBox, Rotate) materialised onto each page, which is what makes partial selections and reordering possible.

• Bookmarks of every source are merged into one tree whose top level items follow the source order.

• Document level features — viewer preferences, page layout and mode, the interactive form, named destinations, embedded files, page labels, XMP metadata — are carried over from the primary source, because they cannot sensibly exist twice in one document.

• Document information is taken from the primary source, merged from all sources, or suppressed; an explicit override always wins. Fix ModificationDate and the output is reproducible byte for byte.

• Encrypted sources are opened, not refused. The standard security handler is implemented for revisions 2 to 6 — RC4, AES-128 and AES-256, including the hardened hash revision 6 introduced — so a source is merged with its user or owner password and every string and stream of it is read in the clear. A document that opens with no password at all, which is the shape of a file that is only protected against editing, needs to be told nothing.

• The result can be encrypted, and is written in the clear unless you ask otherwise. Supplying MergeOutputOptions.Encryption protects the merged document under passwords you choose — RC4-40, RC4-128, AES-128 or AES-256 (the default), with the permission bits the format defines — and the strings and streams of the result are sealed as they are written:

  var plan = MergePlan.Create()
      .AddFile(@"C:\reports\summary.pdf")
      .AddFile(@"C:\reports\appendix.pdf")
      .WithOutput(options => options with
      {
          Encryption = new PdfEncryptionOptions
          {
              Algorithm = PdfEncryptionAlgorithm.AesWith256BitKey,
              UserPassword = "opens-it",
              OwnerPassword = "owns-it",
              Permissions = PdfPermissions.PrintOnly,
          },
      });
  

  A merge of encrypted sources under new passwords needs nothing from the old ones, and a source that was only protected against editing can be merged and re-protected in one step.

• Diagnostics instead of surprises: damaged cross-reference tables are rebuilt by scanning the file, unselected pages that something still points at are folded onto a page that exists, and anything the merge had to change is reported in MergeResult.Warnings as a PdfWarning whose Kind names the condition — the part a caller may match on, while its message is only text.

Getting it into a project

The dependency injection package wires everything behind its ports:

using SharpCorePDF.DependencyInjection;
using SharpCorePDF.Domain.Ports;

services.AddSharpCorePDF();                                      // default engine options
services.AddSharpCorePDF(PdfEngineOptions.Default with { ... });  // explicit options
services.AddSharpCorePDF(configuration);                         // from the "SharpCorePDF" section
services.AddSharpCorePDF(configuration, "My:Pdf:Section");       // from a section of your choosing

var merger = provider.GetRequiredService<IPdfMerger>();
var inspector = provider.GetRequiredService<IPdfInspector>();

Every package targets net10.0 and net11.0 and carries both legs: NuGet hands a net10.0 app the lib/net10.0 assembly and a net11.0 app the lib/net11.0 one, with exactly the same API on both. Nothing else is supported yet — there is no netstandard2.0 or net8.0 leg, so a project that targets .NET 8 or .NET 9 cannot install these packages.

IPdfInspector.InspectAsync describes a document — version, page count and sizes, rotation, metadata, bookmarks, embedded files, form presence, warnings — and opens an encrypted one with the password it is given instead of throwing. A document whose encryption stays closed is reported with PdfDocumentInfo.IsReadable cleared and PdfDocumentInfo.RequiresPassword set when a password is what stands in the way, so a caller can ask for one instead of being told the document is simply unusable.

The package to install is SharpCorePDF. It is the product name and the only name to remember: it carries no code of its own and depends on the four layers below, so one dotnet add package pulls in the whole library:

dotnet add package SharpCorePDF

If you would rather take one layer on its own — SharpCorePDF.Domain has no dependency at all — the four are published separately under the same version, so they install the same way and stay in step with the entry point. Before 1.0.0 the only ids on the feed were the layers, at 1.0.0-preview.1; that is why an older instruction may tell you to add SharpCorePDF.DependencyInjection by name, and why --prerelease was needed then. dotnet add package SharpCorePDF replaces both.

The XML documentation ships inside the packages, so every public type and member is described in IntelliSense without leaving the editor.

To work against this source tree instead of the feed, reference the project (dotnet add reference .\src\SharpCorePDF.DependencyInjection\SharpCorePDF.DependencyInjection.csproj), or pack all five into a local feed and install them from there:

dotnet pack .\SharpCorePDF.slnx -c Release -o $env:TEMP\SharpCorePDF-feed
dotnet nuget add source $env:TEMP\SharpCorePDF-feed --name SharpCorePDF
dotnet add package SharpCorePDF --version 1.0.0

Every package carries the logo as its package icon and embeds this README, so the page a feed shows for it is the introduction you are reading. nuget.org renders images only from a list of trusted hosts and cannot resolve relative paths, which is why the logo and the links in this file are absolute URLs.

Examples

examples/SharpCorePDF.Examples is a console app with nine runnable examples. Every snippet on this page is code that compiles and executes there:

dotnet run --project .\examples\SharpCorePDF.Examples -c Release          # all of them
dotnet run --project .\examples\SharpCorePDF.Examples -- select-pages    # one of them
dotnet run --project .\examples\SharpCorePDF.Examples -- errors options  # several, in this order

The examples generate the documents they merge, so nothing else is needed to run them, and they leave the results in a folder under the temporary directory for you to open. examples/README.md walks through each one.

How it is put together

Five packages: one to install, and four that do the work, one per layer. Each name links to its page on nuget.org.

The domain and the application layer know nothing about PDF syntax; the engine implements their ports. That is what keeps the merge rules testable without a single PDF file, and what would let a different engine be swapped in.

Why the engine looks the way it does

• A source is read into memory once and its objects are resolved on demand, so a damaged object that no page needs never stops a merge.
• Objects are copied in two phases: first every reachable object is reserved a target number, then the bodies are written. That is what makes the cyclic graphs real files contain — a form field that points at its widget which points back at the field — terminate.
• Only objects reachable from the kept pages and features are copied, so the result does not inherit the dead weight of its sources.
• Object streams and cross-reference streams are decoded (their contents have to be understood); every other stream is copied byte for byte. The result uses a classic cross-reference table, which every reader in existence supports.

Known limits (deliberate, for version 1)

• Encryption covers the standard security handler, revisions 2 to 6. A document that uses a public key handler, or a crypt filter that is not RC4, AESV2, AESV3 or None, stays closed: inspection reports it with PdfDocumentInfo.IsReadable cleared and PdfDocumentInfo.RequiresPassword still false, because no password would help, and a merge refuses it with PdfEncryptionException.
• The merged document is written in the clear unless MergeOutputOptions.Encryption asks for more. Encryption is opt in, and a result has its own passwords and permissions: what a source declared is never carried into it.
• Passwords are taken exactly as they are given, without SASLprep normalization, so a password whose normalized form differs from the form its producer used must be supplied as the producer wrote it. Revisions 2 to 4 predate any agreement on how the characters of one become bytes — Adobe, qpdf and pypdf all hash the Latin-1 bytes of the text, which is what the engine reads and writes, and text with no Latin-1 form is hashed as UTF-8 — while revisions 5 and 6 are UTF-8 by definition and use at most 127 bytes.
• An encrypted result is reproducible byte for byte only when it is written with RC4. AES seals every value with a fresh initialization vector and AES-256 draws a random file key, so two runs of the same merge differ; RC4 keeps no such state, so fixing ModificationDate fixes the output.
• Named destinations are merged from the primary source only. A bookmark of another source that used a named destination keeps its title and loses its destination, and the merge says so in its warnings.
• The result is written as PDF 1.4 – 2.0 with a classic cross-reference table and no object streams; MergeOutputOptions.TargetVersion (default PDF 1.7) decides the header.
• A reference to a page that was not selected is folded onto the first page that source contributed, so a link stays valid instead of dangling.
• A bookmark that is stored inline in the page tree (not as an indirect object) cannot be referenced and is skipped, with a warning.

Building and testing

# Everything at once, through the solution: the five packages, the tests,
# the examples and the measurement harness.
dotnet build .\SharpCorePDF.slnx -c Release
dotnet test  .\SharpCorePDF.slnx                      # 447 tests on net10.0, 447 on net11.0
dotnet run --project .\examples\SharpCorePDF.Examples -c Release

# Or one project at a time:
dotnet build .\src\SharpCorePDF.DependencyInjection\SharpCorePDF.DependencyInjection.csproj

# The test project must build an app host, which the RID-less net10.0 leg of some SDK builds skips:
dotnet test .\tests\SharpCorePDF.Tests\SharpCorePDF.Tests.csproj -p:TargetFramework=net11.0
dotnet test .\tests\SharpCorePDF.Tests\SharpCorePDF.Tests.csproj -p:TargetFramework=net10.0 -r win-x64

The tests cover the domain invariants, the serialisation details, the reader against a real-world document, a document that uses object streams and cross-reference streams, a document with bookmarks, page labels, annotations and a rotated page, one encrypted document per revision of the standard security handler — including one whose password is not ASCII — the merge path through the container, and the encryption of a merged result, which every algorithm is checked against by reading the document back with the password it was written with.

Measuring what a merge costs

dotnet run -c Release --project .\tools\SharpCorePDF.Measure
dotnet run -c Release --project .\tools\SharpCorePDF.Measure -- --single large

# GC mode is part of the measurement, and server mode is the deployment envelope:
$env:DOTNET_gcServer = "1"; dotnet run -c Release --project .\tools\SharpCorePDF.Measure

The harness reports the bytes a merge allocates, its wall time, the same allocations as a multiple of the input, throughput, the heap still held after a full collection, and the bytes the merge wrote — that last column is a fingerprint, because two runs that write the same bytes ran the same merge. --single <all|large|one|half> samples the managed heap during one isolated merge, which is what "peak" means. The recorded numbers, and what they say about the performance and memory budgets, are in docs/measurements.md.

Validating the output with an independent implementation

uv run --with pikepdf python .\docs\tools\validate-pdf.py <file.pdf>
uv run --with pikepdf python .\docs\tools\validate-pdf.py --password <password> <encrypted.pdf>
uv run --with pikepdf python .\docs\tools\make-fixtures.py .\tests\SharpCorePDF.Tests\Assets

validate-pdf.py runs qpdf --check, decodes every stream in the file, and prints the geometry, rotation and annotations of every page; with --password it does the same for an encrypted document and prints what qpdf makes of its encryption dictionary. It is the check that caught the one bug this library has had so far: a hexadecimal string written with name escapes, which qpdf rejected as damage. The encrypted documents the merge engine writes were checked the same way with qpdf, pikepdf and pypdf.

Continuous integration

ci.yml runs on every push to main and on every pull request: it builds the solution, runs both test legs under the coverage collector, scans with SonarCloud, and fails the run when the quality gate fails. It is deliberately not the publishing workflow, so a pull request is checked without anything reaching a feed.

The analysis runs in the runner rather than on SonarCloud's side, which is what lets it carry coverage: the scanner session opens before the build, the measured test leg runs inside it, and it closes after it, so the report describes the assemblies that run produced. Coverage comes from dotnet-coverage collect, because global.json pins Microsoft.Testing.Platform as the test runner and the VSTest-only switches (--collect "XPlat Code Coverage") are rejected there. The collector's binary report is converted once, to the Visual Studio XML the scanner reads; the same file is kept as a build artifact, so the number can be read without opening SonarCloud.

What the scan reports on is src/ and tests/, with the BMad Method bundle (_bmad, _bmad-output, .cline), the Python tooling under docs/, the examples and the measurement harness excluded, because the gate is about what the packages ship rather than about everything in the tree. The coverage condition counts the four layered assemblies and the entry point only: test code contributes no lines to it, so the number describes the shipped surface. It was 92% when this paragraph was written; the suite that measures it sits at 99%, and a suite covering itself is not coverage of anything.

The gate fails the run:

sonar.qualitygate.wait, passed to the scanner's begin step, is what turns it from a badge into a gate: the scan waits for the analysis to be processed and fails when the gate fails, so a green badge is a run that passed rather than a run that is not finished yet. It goes on begin because the end phase rejects every property but the token. The 90% is a setting on that gate, not a property of this tree: until it is entered there, the step enforces Sonar's 80% and is telling the truth about the wrong number.

Two things switch the analysis on, and both live outside this repository:

1. A project on SonarCloud under the key MPCoreDeveloper_SharpCorePDF in the organisation mpcoredeveloper, with Automatic Analysis switched off (Administration → Analysis Method). A repository cannot be analysed both ways at once: with it on, the scanner's end step fails with "You are running CI analysis while Automatic Analysis is enabled", and Automatic Analysis cannot import a coverage report anyway — it never sees the test run.
2. The repository secret SONAR_TOKEN (settings → Secrets and variables → Actions), a token from that SonarCloud account.

Until the secret exists, the scanning steps are skipped and the workflow still builds, tests and measures coverage, because the presence of the token is decided in a small first job — a job-level if cannot read a secret itself. That is what keeps a fork, or this repository before the project was created, from showing a red run that says nothing about the code.

The same rules, locally

src/Directory.Build.props references SonarAnalyzer.CSharp, so dotnet build runs the rules the SonarCloud profile runs and reports a finding at the line that causes it instead of after a push. The build is clean on both legs with the analyzer enabled. Three findings this repository answers with a decision rather than a change — S101 for the product's capitalised name, S1694 for the closed PdfObject hierarchy, S4790 for the MD5 that the PDF encryption algorithms specify — are silenced per file in src/.editorconfig, each with the reason, and the affected lines carry // NOSONAR so the server reaches the same conclusion. Everything else the analyzer reports is meant to be fixed.

Publishing

Packages go to nuget.org from .github/workflows/publish.yml, and no API key is stored anywhere. The workflow asks GitHub for an OIDC token, exchanges it with nuget.org for a temporary API key that lives for one hour, and pushes. nuget.org performs that exchange only when the token matches a trusted publishing policy for this repository, so the workflow can publish nothing until that policy exists.

The policy lives at nuget.org → your username → Trusted Publishing, and its fields are the ones the workflow's header comment records:

The Create form then asks which scopes the policy grants — pushing new packages, pushing new versions of existing packages and unlisting are offered separately — and which packages those scopes apply to. That box is the one the portal labels Glob Patterns and Packages (Separate by a new line), and it takes one glob or exact package ID per line:

SharpCorePDF
SharpCorePDF.*

An empty box is refused with At least one valid glob pattern or package must be specified. A line may hold only *, letters, digits, _, . and -, which is why both lines are accepted — and both are needed. SharpCorePDF.* matches the four layers, which all have a dot after the product name, and does not match SharpCorePDF itself, which has not. A policy holding only the glob publishes four packages and refuses the entry point with 403 Forbidden; five lines holding the five IDs cover the same ground. The temporary API key is scoped to the subjects written there, so a package that no subject matches cannot be pushed.

The policy is owned by a nuget.org user or organization and applies to every package that owner owns; its scopes decide whether it may publish new packages, new versions of existing ones, or both. The user: input the workflow passes to NuGet/login is that account's username, kept as the repository secret NUGET_USERNAME (settings → Secrets and variables → Actions).

Publishing then happens one of two ways:

• Actions → publish → Run workflow. With publish left false it stops after packing: both test legs run, every package is checked, and the packages are pushed into a throwaway local feed as a handshake. Set publish to true to carry on to nuget.org.
• Push a v* tag — git tag v1.0.0 && git push origin v1.0.0. The tag is a v followed by the exact <Version> in src/Directory.Build.props, because a tagged run refuses to publish a version the tag does not name: v1.0.0-preview.1 against a <Version> of 1.0.0 fails the check instead of publishing. The first tag that did publish was v1.0.0-preview.1, which put the four layers on the feed on 2026-10-15; v1.0.0 is the tag that adds the entry point.

Nothing reaches a feed until the packages pass that check: every .nupkg must carry both lib/net10.0 and lib/net11.0, which is the promise made in src/Directory.Build.props.

A version on nuget.org is immutable, so bump <Version> before publishing; --skip-duplicate makes a re-run of an already-published version a no-op instead of an error. Publishing from a workstation still means a long-lived API key, because the temporary ones exist only inside a CI run. GitHub Packages is a separate mechanism that does not use any of this: it wants a token with packages: write, either GITHUB_TOKEN inside a workflow or a personal access token from a workstation.

What has to be true before any of that is spent on a version number — the package id, the settled surface, the single target framework, the changelog, the symbols, and the dry run — is written down as a gate list in docs/release-checklist.md. The .NET Foundation's eligibility criteria, adopted here as the project's public bar rather than as an application tactic, are mapped criterion by criterion in docs/foundation-readiness.md. The eight conditions that decide when an application is filed, and the answers it will contain, are in docs/foundation-application.md.

Contributing

Read CONTRIBUTING.md before the first pull request: it names the two SDKs the build needs, the per-framework test invocations, the bar a change has to clear, and what a merge buys you in rights. Participation falls under the Code of Conduct, and a suspected vulnerability goes through SECURITY.md rather than through the issue tracker — a public issue describing a crash in a PDF parser is a working exploit by the time it is indexed.

Feedback

Bugs, questions and feature requests go to the issue tracker. The most valuable report of all is a merge that produced a file something else cannot open: attach the sources if you can, and the warning list the merge returned, and it becomes a test.