3 ms·

This doesn't sound like once every 20-30 years (.NET itself is only 22): > We do not guarantee 100% compatibility between major versions. This is true for both

This doesn't sound like once every 20-30 years (.NET itself is only 22): > We do not guarantee 100% compatibility between major versions. This is true for both ASP.NET Core and the runtime itself. We intentionally make breaking changes where we believe that they are necessary to move the platform forward and the cost of the .NET ecosystem adjusting to them is low enough. There is a major .NET release every year. Every other release is LTS with 3 years of support. > The old .NET framework will be supported for many decades into the future I'd guess so but Microsoft is not as clear on this as you'd wish. In all their policy documents they say it's "supported as a Windows component on the latest required update" or "Beginning with version 4.5.2 and later, .NET Framework is defined as a component of the Windows operating system (OS). Components receive the same support as their parent products, therefore, .NET Framework 4.5.2 and later follows the lifecycle policy of the underlying Windows OS on which it is installed." To me this seems to be carefully written to allow the possibility of changing that Windows component status in a Windows release. So, .NET Framework is supported as long as it is part of Windows, until it isn't.

fabian2k 3y ago
There was one huge breaking change, that was the move from the Windows-only .NET Framework to the cross-platform .NET Core. I assume that is the one the parent is talking about. The major releases of modern .NET are relatively painless now, there aren't that many breaking changes. This is pretty much the same as many other languages, and kinda unavoidable unless you go for an ecosystem that aims for very long term stability and is essentially frozen. The early .NET Core releases had some annoying breaking changes, but it's very different today.
Jenk 3y ago
They are _very_ averse to breaking changes, however.
dagaci 3y ago
>>We do not guarantee 100% compatibility between major versions. This is a true caveat for any language or framework, and is a sensible disclaimer. But I think the author was referring to transition from “.Net Framework 4” series (since 2001 when I first used it, ~23 years ago) where Microsoft declared “.Net Framework 4.8” would be the last major version of that series. And that new developments should use the “.NET Core” series, which is now named just “.NET “.

fabian2k 3y ago

There was one huge breaking change, that was the move from the Windows-only .NET Framework to the cross-platform .NET Core. I assume that is the one the parent is talking about. The major releases of modern .NET are relatively painless now, there aren't that many breaking changes. This is pretty much the same as many other languages, and kinda unavoidable unless you go for an ecosystem that aims for very long term stability and is essentially frozen. The early .NET Core releases had some annoying breaking changes, but it's very different today.

Jenk 3y ago

They are _very_ averse to breaking changes, however.

dagaci 3y ago

>>We do not guarantee 100% compatibility between major versions. This is a true caveat for any language or framework, and is a sensible disclaimer. But I think the author was referring to transition from “.Net Framework 4” series (since 2001 when I first used it, ~23 years ago) where Microsoft declared “.Net Framework 4.8” would be the last major version of that series. And that new developments should use the “.NET Core” series, which is now named just “.NET “.