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

Update .NET Core versioning topic for 2.1 #4352

Closed
jmathew opened this issue Feb 9, 2018 · 10 comments · Fixed by #6453
Closed

Update .NET Core versioning topic for 2.1 #4352

jmathew opened this issue Feb 9, 2018 · 10 comments · Fixed by #6453
Assignees
Labels
⌚ Not Triaged Not triaged

Comments

@jmathew
Copy link

jmathew commented Feb 9, 2018

This article suggests that the runtime and the SDK would share the same version number starting from net core 2.0:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/versions/

When downloading an SDK or runtime, the version number you see is going to be the same.

However if you go to the downloads page you can clearly see separate versions.

image

I believe this needs some clarification.

@mairaw
Copy link
Contributor

mairaw commented Feb 12, 2018

Thanks for your feedback @jmathew. This has changed again and the version topic needs to be updated.

@KathleenDollard, do we have the new versioning proposal in a public repo already?

@KathleenDollard
Copy link
Contributor

KathleenDollard commented Feb 13, 2018 via email

@mairaw
Copy link
Contributor

mairaw commented Feb 13, 2018

Thanks @KathleenDollard. I was looking for that content in the folders and not in the form of a PR.

Now, the SDK and runtime versions are not unified and are not matching the first and second positions. I'll add a quick note for now to this topic to explain this is not valid anymore for 2.1 SDK. But I'm not sure how to explain this interim version that is not unified but also doesn't reflect the long-term plan.

@KathleenDollard
Copy link
Contributor

@mairaw I want to be sure I understand your comment:

2.0.x / 2.0.x easy to talk about
2.0.x / 2.1.x interim, very hard to explain
2.1.x / 2.1.xxx long term, hopefully we can explain

It would help if we had a common way to explain that interim.

The truth is we thought we could do semantic versioning for runtime and SDK independently because we release independently. That failed because of use of .NET Core 2.1 in too many places (failing to distinguish runtime and SDK). Since it failed, we developed the new version.

@mairaw
Copy link
Contributor

mairaw commented Feb 13, 2018

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. That disruption in the interim is hard to explain.

@KathleenDollard
Copy link
Contributor

Can you find a way to explain that we recognized that it wasn't working?

@KathleenDollard
Copy link
Contributor

KathleenDollard commented Feb 16, 2018 via email

@KathleenDollard
Copy link
Contributor

@mairaw

Are you looking for the older proposal that said we were doing semantic versioning that explains the version numbers explained here? I can look for that if it helps. This interim version was a committed strategy, we just realized we were committed to the wrong strategy.

@mairaw mairaw modified the milestones: Sprint 132 (2/24/18 - 3/16/18), 2018 - Quarter 2 Mar 19, 2018
@mairaw mairaw changed the title Are the runtime and SDK versions supposed to be the same? Update .NET Core versioning topic for 2.1 Jun 18, 2018
@mairaw mairaw modified the milestones: 2018 - Quarter 2, Sprint 138 (07/02/2018 - 07/20/2018) Jun 18, 2018
@mairaw
Copy link
Contributor

mairaw commented Jun 18, 2018

@KathleenDollard could you help us with this work item? I'm happy to help you with the doc process and how everything works.

@KathleenDollard
Copy link
Contributor

@mairaw I am working on this. That topic is massively overloaded. I'm setting a meeting with you about what we drop and what we make a different topic. The core info on the version is ready for review, but I want to discuss before I do the PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
⌚ Not Triaged Not triaged
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants