[Discussion] Azure Functions Runtime 1.0.11959 release

[mhoeger]

Discussion issue for the Azure Functions runtime release 1.0.11959

[TurtleBeach]

ARRGH. What is the difference between 1 (ONE). 0 11959 Azure Functions Runtime and Azure Functions 2.0.11961-alpha? Why two similarly numbered releases. You guys are driving me crazy with your numbering .

[mhoeger]

Since you're curious, the crazy patch numbering just comes from our build pipeline. It's not beautiful, but we really only care about the functional purpose of newer 1.x.xxxx build > older 1.x.xxxx. Same with v2.x versions.

Ideally we don't want people to have to worry about what patch version of the functions runtime you are using, since we update that automatically based off of chosen major version (hence the mess). While v2 is in preview though, we've asked people to be more mindful of which releases they are running on. I'm sorry you've had to deal with parsing through the more difficult to remember numbers!

[alexjamesbrown]

@mhoeger

How can I force my local environment to use this runtime version?
(I think this will resolve my comment here - Azure/azure-functions-host#3179 (comment))

Running func I see the following:

Azure Functions Core Tools (2.0.1-beta.35)
Function Runtime Version: 2.0.11960.0

However, hitting f5 in my function app in visual studio, I see it's using Version=1.0.11913.0

Is there some way to tell the app to use 1.0.11959 (or above)

[mhoeger]

UPDATE: The issue above about missing the local version of this release is resolved