4 ms·

> From the previous version of .Net Core only. Which is already three major versions ahead off classic .net. You’re literally complaining about making upgrade

> From the previous version of .Net Core only. Which is already three major versions ahead off classic .net. You’re literally complaining about making upgrades past four major releases not being drop-in compatible. Can you show any other stack which has made such strides to modernise and maintain better compatibility?

Someone1234 6y ago
No, I'm literally complaining about the misleading messaging surrounding .Net 5.0 "merging" .Net Framework and .Net Core. My post was very clear on that. Like this quote from the linked article: > .NET 5.0 is the first release in our .NET unification journey. We built .NET 5.0 to enable a much larger group of developers to migrate their .NET Framework code and apps to .NET 5.0.
- HideousKojima 6y ago
  I believe that verbage is mostly referring to options for VB.NET, Winforms, and WPF being available in Core, meaning projects that use those can be ported
- josteink 6y ago
  > No, I'm literally complaining about the misleading messaging surrounding .Net 5.0 "merging" .Net Framework and .Net Core. Yes, it’s kinda cheating. On the other hand it has been obvious since .Net Core 1.0 that this is where the future is going to be. All announcements before .Net 5 has been clear on the compatibility issues and preparations required, for a couple of years now. Whoever haven’t been planning this migration can thank themselves. Calling what is effectively .Net Core 4.0 for simply “.Net 5.0” is just a way to make it completely obvious, even to those not paying attention, that .Net Framework 4.8 is now superseded, and that the upgrade path is .Net (Core). There’s no other option around the corner. Get with the times. Etc.