• StudioLE@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Developers are complaining that bug fixes are being released in .NET 8 but not 7? Why would they be?

    .NET 7 isn’t an LTS and the major version upgrades rarely introduce anything breaking so upgrading should be seamless. So why would anyone be desperate to cling on to 7?

    • hdsrob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Probably because 8 doesn’t come out for several months, and they want the fixes now.

    • rmam@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some projects can’t afford full regression tests or work to upgrade stuff to the latest and greatest. Production projects are handled differently than personal projects with less than one nine reliability.

      • jvisick@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Any production project, especially with that sort of rigor, should be sticking to the LTS releases. IMO there is no project that should be on 7 with no plans to upgrade to 8 after it’s released.

        If a version upgrade is out of scope, then it should’ve been built on 6 to begin with.

        • rmam@programming.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Any production project, especially with that sort of rigor (…)

          There is no rigour. There is semantic versioning, patch/bugfix releases, the understanding that stability trumps the latest and greatest, and not having an infinite budget to perpetually work on maintaining projects with unbounded resources, including full regression tests.

          Those who care about what they deliver also care about stability.

          If a version upgrade is out of scope (…)

          It’s a major version bump, which is expected to include breaking changes. Professional teams are mindful of resource allocation. Not everyone works exclusively on personal projects.

          There is no way around this.

          • podatus@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            do you even .net? “stability trumps the latest and greatest”, that’s exactly what who you’re replying to said. If one is making the choice to use 7 in the context of stability, then one has already planned an upgrade to 8 upon release; otherwise stick to 6.

            • rmam@programming.devOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              do you even .net?

              Yes, I do. Do you?

              that’s exactly what who you’re replying to said.

              Not really. Stability does not mean consuming a package that’s supported for a long time. Stability is a function of the work you put into your project. You can consume all the LTS stuff you can think of, and still release an unstable mess.

              In this case, being forced to undergo a major version upgrade without being able to do full regression tests is exactly how you get your projects to break, no matter how many LTS dependencies you consume.

              The whole point of this thread is that it’s preferable to consume bug fixes in patch releases than being forced to undergo major version upgrades. Do you disagree?

              • podatus@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                being forced to undergo a major version upgrade without being able to do full regression tests is exactly how you get your projects to break, no matter how many LTS dependencies you consume

                that’s exactly what’s already being said. First, there’s only one LTS change even being discussed, e.g. no one is talking about moving from 6 to 8 or back porting from an upcoming 8 to 6. Second, if your not going to be bothered with the very preparations your mentioning should be made when choosing 7, then one should choose 6.

                The whole point of this thread is that it’s preferable to consume bug fixes in patch releases than being forced to undergo major version upgrades. Do you disagree?

                Fundamentally, if I enter into a contract of using 7 then I understand sets of bugfixes won’t necessarily be back ported.

                • rmam@programming.devOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  First, there’s only one LTS change even being discussed, e.g. no one is talking about moving from 6 to 8 or back porting from an upcoming 8 to 6.

                  It sounds you lost track of the discussion. OP clearly pointed out the scenario of being forced to upgrade to 8 instead of sticking with 7.

                  I don’t think it’s worth to continue discussing this. Apparently you’re arguing without context and in the process talking besides the point.