5 ms·

My God, is this ever going to settle down?! I skipped all the .NET Core 1.x fiasco and decided to wait for .NET Standard 2.0, as it seemed like they learned the

My God, is this ever going to settle down?! I skipped all the .NET Core 1.x fiasco and decided to wait for .NET Standard 2.0, as it seemed like they learned the lesson, but now it starts all over again.

mrweasel 9y ago
Yeah, as good as .Net is, they really need to work towards a: "Just download this and everything will work ".
- bad_user 9y ago
  When an upgrade breaks the ecosystem without that breakage being discussed and announced along with future plans, then .Net is not very good, is it?
  - insulanian 9y ago
    I don't think this has anything to do with .NET being good or bad. The issue is completely orthogonal.
- SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
  > "Just download this and everything will work " Ah, the old debate in .Net between the lumpers and the splitters. Between the "just install .Net and that's it, it makes no sense to install all these little interdependent pieces one at a time. it's too complex and versioning is hell" and the "this web server doesn't need the WPF libraries, it's just dead weight, bloat, and makes it harder to start up new machines. It makes no sense to bring out a new version of WPF because there's a bug fix in ASP. Or worse, delay release." The thing is, there is no one right answer, only opposing forces that have to be reconciled. .Net core started out fairly radical, which favoured the early adopters and neophiles who tend towards splitters, but is now generally veering towards larger corporate adoption, which tends to wards lumpers. But there are exceptions.
  - RubyPinch 9y ago
    I don't think anyone really is angered by a modular system, its more the needing-to-pay-attention-to-every-little-bit (especially when those bits are mixed up in really poor naming, corporate speak, etc) is the more practical issue
  - dozzie 9y ago
    > Between the "just install .Net and that's it [...]" and the "this web server doesn't need the WPF libraries, it's just dead weight [...]" > The thing is, there is no one right answer, only opposing forces that have to be reconciled. Really? I thought this was a mostly solved problem. I certainly see it as such when I use modern packaging systems that were developed almost two decades ago.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
      > I certainly see it as such when I use modern packaging systems that were developed almost two decades ago. I'm not sure if you have something specific to say about the nuget package management system; how it was used to deliver packages in .Net core and how and why the strategy has changed from delivering the framework as lots of small packages to delivering it as few larger packages; or if you are just being flippant and ignorant.
      - dozzie 9y ago
        I would certainly go with ignorant. I stay away from Windows and, in consequence, from .NET. I've heard about NuGet, but I haven't used it, so I don't know if it is any good. On the other hand, I've seen both strategies (large and small packages) in use, and the better dependency resolution mechanisms and package building tools, the better small packages work. I don't need to install plethora of GNOME and Python packages, I just run `apt-get install exaile' and have it installed. From programmer's perspective this works equally well; I may want to include some specific part of Boost library, but I can also run `apt-get install liboost-all-dev' and be done, and leave detecting the actual dependencies to package builder's tooling.
- bpicolo 9y ago
  Have you tried the new SPA templates? https://github.com/aspnet/JavaScriptServices https://github.com/aspnet/JavaScriptServices They're better at "download this and everything will work" than any equivalent I've found in the ecosystem for other languages (though elixir/phoenix is there, too). I'm impressed (as a .net newcomer). With postgres support through npgsql, I'm doing my latest side project in C#. We'll see how it goes.
rebelde 9y ago
I think the old rule of waiting till version 3 for Microsoft products applies here.
- oblio 9y ago
  More like wait till version 3.11 :p
manigandham 9y ago
The standard .NET Framework has been settled and stable for a decade, and it's still completely valid for use. .NET Core is a new project with a vast amount of reworking and as usual, version 2.0 tends to be the best release to wait for. Considering it's not even out yet, not sure what all the outrage is for.

mrweasel 9y ago

Yeah, as good as .Net is, they really need to work towards a: "Just download this and everything will work ".

bad_user 9y ago
When an upgrade breaks the ecosystem without that breakage being discussed and announced along with future plans, then .Net is not very good, is it?
- insulanian 9y ago
  I don't think this has anything to do with .NET being good or bad. The issue is completely orthogonal.
SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
> "Just download this and everything will work " Ah, the old debate in .Net between the lumpers and the splitters. Between the "just install .Net and that's it, it makes no sense to install all these little interdependent pieces one at a time. it's too complex and versioning is hell" and the "this web server doesn't need the WPF libraries, it's just dead weight, bloat, and makes it harder to start up new machines. It makes no sense to bring out a new version of WPF because there's a bug fix in ASP. Or worse, delay release." The thing is, there is no one right answer, only opposing forces that have to be reconciled. .Net core started out fairly radical, which favoured the early adopters and neophiles who tend towards splitters, but is now generally veering towards larger corporate adoption, which tends to wards lumpers. But there are exceptions.
- RubyPinch 9y ago
  I don't think anyone really is angered by a modular system, its more the needing-to-pay-attention-to-every-little-bit (especially when those bits are mixed up in really poor naming, corporate speak, etc) is the more practical issue
- dozzie 9y ago
  > Between the "just install .Net and that's it [...]" and the "this web server doesn't need the WPF libraries, it's just dead weight [...]" > The thing is, there is no one right answer, only opposing forces that have to be reconciled. Really? I thought this was a mostly solved problem. I certainly see it as such when I use modern packaging systems that were developed almost two decades ago.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
    > I certainly see it as such when I use modern packaging systems that were developed almost two decades ago. I'm not sure if you have something specific to say about the nuget package management system; how it was used to deliver packages in .Net core and how and why the strategy has changed from delivering the framework as lots of small packages to delivering it as few larger packages; or if you are just being flippant and ignorant.
    - dozzie 9y ago
      I would certainly go with ignorant. I stay away from Windows and, in consequence, from .NET. I've heard about NuGet, but I haven't used it, so I don't know if it is any good. On the other hand, I've seen both strategies (large and small packages) in use, and the better dependency resolution mechanisms and package building tools, the better small packages work. I don't need to install plethora of GNOME and Python packages, I just run `apt-get install exaile' and have it installed. From programmer's perspective this works equally well; I may want to include some specific part of Boost library, but I can also run `apt-get install liboost-all-dev' and be done, and leave detecting the actual dependencies to package builder's tooling.
bpicolo 9y ago
Have you tried the new SPA templates? https://github.com/aspnet/JavaScriptServices https://github.com/aspnet/JavaScriptServices They're better at "download this and everything will work" than any equivalent I've found in the ecosystem for other languages (though elixir/phoenix is there, too). I'm impressed (as a .net newcomer). With postgres support through npgsql, I'm doing my latest side project in C#. We'll see how it goes.

rebelde 9y ago

I think the old rule of waiting till version 3 for Microsoft products applies here.

oblio 9y ago
More like wait till version 3.11 :p

manigandham 9y ago

The standard .NET Framework has been settled and stable for a decade, and it's still completely valid for use. .NET Core is a new project with a vast amount of reworking and as usual, version 2.0 tends to be the best release to wait for. Considering it's not even out yet, not sure what all the outrage is for.