Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove invalid versions #9441

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 13, 2024
Merged

Conversation

Falco20019
Copy link
Contributor

@Falco20019 Falco20019 commented Aug 9, 2024

I removed some invalid versions that sadly found their way into the JSON files.

/CC @richlander

@@ -338,7 +338,6 @@
"11-21h2-e",
"10-21h2-e-lts",
"10-21h2-iot-lts",
"10-20h2-e-lts",
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Windows 10 20H2 was only a semi-anual version and never a LTS. Therefore there was also no information on EndOfLife.date.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are right. Not sure what happened there. Likely a copy/paste error.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't 10-20h2-e and 10-20h2-2 be added to the unsupported list?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

10-20h2-e and 10-20h2-w are already on the unsupported list. Not sure what you mean by 10-20h2-2.

@@ -393,11 +392,9 @@
"x86"
],
"supported-versions": [
"23H2",
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Falco20019 Falco20019 Aug 9, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And besides https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/windowscontainers/deploy-containers/base-image-lifecycle stating that 1607 is only Semi-Anual and released on Nano Server, whereas 2016 is the only Long-Term on Server Core:
image

https://mcr.microsoft.com/en-us/product/windows/servercore shows that it's instead handled like the Server-Core case with 2019 and 1809:
image

So in my opinion, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/windowscontainers/deploy-containers/base-image-lifecycle should be fixed to be like this:
image

If 1607 and 1809 are considered LTSC as well, we should update the EOL dates on https://endoflife.date/windows-server-core as well to show they are still maintained (as shown by the image tags on MCR). As of now, both are considered EOL while the LTSC variants are supported:
image
image

Copy link
Member

@richlander richlander Aug 10, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Server 2012: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/windows-server-2012

Containers started with 2016, so the container-related lifecycle page is providing a partial view of Windows Server lifecycle.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Falco20019 Falco20019 Aug 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But since there are no images available, there is nothing to have support for 🤔 Or did there exist a non-containered installation option for 2012? In that case, I will re-add it here and have EoL.dates updated.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Falco20019 Falco20019 Aug 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, I found https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/desktop/legacy/hh846313(v=vs.85) so I missed to add 2012 to EoL.date.

Will have a PR there and fix it here tomorrow once in office.

@richlander
Copy link
Member

LGTM. Add 2012 back and then we can merge.

Thanks for noticing this!

@Falco20019
Copy link
Contributor Author

I only removed 2012 from windows-server-core and not windows-server as there isn't an image:
image

@richlander
Copy link
Member

My point was that Windows Containers started with 2016 so this search isn't testing anything. Server Core pre-dates containers.

@Falco20019
Copy link
Contributor Author

Falco20019 commented Aug 11, 2024

My point (in the reply, not the comment above which was created earlier) was about which version server core was introduced with as installation option. Seems to be 2012, right? So adding that to EoL.date should be enough to cover all versions?

@richlander
Copy link
Member

Got it. Sorry about that.

@Falco20019
Copy link
Contributor Author

I will add 2012 here in 1H once I'm on the office and make a PR for it on EoL.date :)

It was available as installation option, but not as containered variant
@Falco20019
Copy link
Contributor Author

Falco20019 commented Aug 12, 2024

@richlander I re-added it to .NET 6 and 8 and added it to .NET 7 and 9 where it had been missing in the first place. I did so, because windows-server lists 2012 explicitly on those two as well. Is this correct?

I requested to add 2008 and 2012 to EoL.date as I missed them earlier: endoflife-date/endoflife.date#5643

Do we need to add 2008 as unsupported-versions to windows-server or windows-server-core on .NET 6? I assume not, since even though it's still in ESU and also was when .NET 6 released, it had still been considered EOL at that time and therefore was not added, right?

@Falco20019 Falco20019 requested a review from richlander August 12, 2024 05:53
@richlander
Copy link
Member

That all tracks for me.

We don't add OSes to unsupported if we are still supporting them, like the ESU case you call out. For clarity, the decision to support an OS longer than standard EOL is arbitrary (not documented by policy) and not specific to MS-owned OSes. We have on occasion chosen to support Ubuntu longer than standard EOL since we had multiple customers who needed that. I am sure this will happen again.

That makes these files all the more valuable as a source of truth.

"2022",
"2019",
"2016"
"2016",
"2012-R2",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm asking for insight on 2012/R2 on .NET 9 support, from @jamshedd.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Falco20019 Falco20019 Aug 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same for 2008/R2 then since it's in ESU4: https://learn.microsoft.com/de-de/lifecycle/products/windows-server-2008-r2
Was never listed as supported in the past (also not on the markdown before having the JSON).

Copy link
Member

@richlander richlander Aug 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I got confirmation that we still support 2012/R2, including for .NET 9. It was the lowest Server OS we've supported, so no need to add 2008.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Question about 2008 is still open.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was saying it is correct that 2008 was never listed. We never supported it, so it should not be in either supported or unsupported lists. This one isn't a function of ESU. It's that we don't test it and it may not work. We do test Server 2012.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the clarification. Then this should be fine. EoL.date was merged, so I will have another run of distrossed and the core-support tooling to see if any more might be off. But should be fine to merge otherwise :)

@richlander
Copy link
Member

Is that it? Read to merge?

BiNZGi pushed a commit to endoflife-date/endoflife.date that referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2024
On those 2 releases (with the R2 variants), it only existed as build option but not as container image. They share the lifecycle / EoS dates of the windows-server variant.

See the following links to prove their existance:

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/desktop/legacy/ee391645(v=vs.85)
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/desktop/legacy/ee391631(v=vs.85)
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/desktop/legacy/hh846323(v=vs.85)

This came up during dotnet/core#9441
@richlander
Copy link
Member

Merging. There will also be opportunity for more changes!

Thanks for the contribution.

@richlander richlander merged commit 7da6443 into dotnet:main Aug 13, 2024
2 checks passed
@Falco20019 Falco20019 deleted the fix-server-core-versions branch August 23, 2024 09:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants