Assuming that they will do EEE here once more, can the community fork the latest version of. Net and do with it whatever they want, including maintaining cross platform support if MS decides to abandon that part?
The mit license allows forking, merging, modifying and releases of modified code. Yes id assume so yes :)
I have a lot of bad things to say about some microsoft teams and some microsoft managers (cough fluentui webcomponents team cough ), but in general the .net team is a nice one and ive had several nice encounters with few of its devs.
Just dont know what the actual bloody fuck the manager/team was thinking dropping linux when they made maui…
What I would really like to know is the thought process behind using the oldest dependency version in a version range in .NET instead of the newest like literally every other package or dependency manager ever made. That design couldn’t be worse if it was designed to maximize security holes.
If you specify that e.g. a dependency should be between version >= 4.0 and < 4.1 in dotnet and there are versions 4.0.0 and 4.0.1 available pretty much all other systems choose 4.0.1 based on the idea that that will include a fix while dotnet chooses 4.0.0 based on the idea that that is “more stable”.
Ah, thats fair. I think thats fixable using wildcards in the packagereference in the csproj, but id need to check. I too would expect it to choose 4.0.1 unless a patch release needs a big update or something
Assuming that they will do EEE here once more, can the community fork the latest version of. Net and do with it whatever they want, including maintaining cross platform support if MS decides to abandon that part?
The mit license allows forking, merging, modifying and releases of modified code. Yes id assume so yes :)
I have a lot of bad things to say about some microsoft teams and some microsoft managers (cough fluentui webcomponents team cough ), but in general the .net team is a nice one and ive had several nice encounters with few of its devs.
Just dont know what the actual bloody fuck the manager/team was thinking dropping linux when they made maui…
What I would really like to know is the thought process behind using the oldest dependency version in a version range in .NET instead of the newest like literally every other package or dependency manager ever made. That design couldn’t be worse if it was designed to maximize security holes.
Care to elaborate? I dont fully follow ^^; Feel free to also dm me or something
If you specify that e.g. a dependency should be between version >= 4.0 and < 4.1 in dotnet and there are versions 4.0.0 and 4.0.1 available pretty much all other systems choose 4.0.1 based on the idea that that will include a fix while dotnet chooses 4.0.0 based on the idea that that is “more stable”.
Ah, thats fair. I think thats fixable using wildcards in the packagereference in the csproj, but id need to check. I too would expect it to choose 4.0.1 unless a patch release needs a big update or something