.NET

1470 readers

21 users here now

Getting started

Useful resources

IDEs and code editors

Visual Studio (Windows/Mac)
Rider (Windows/Mac/Linux)
Visual Studio Code (Windows/Mac/Linux)

Tools

Decompilers: ILSpy, dotPeek
Scratchpad: LINQPad
Online playground and IL viewer: SharpLab

Rules

Rule 1: Follow Lemmy rules
Rule 2: Be excellent to each other, no hostility towards users for any reason
Rule 3: No spam of tools/companies/advertisements

Related communities

Wikipedia pages

.NET (open source & cross platform)
.NET Framework (proprietary & Windows-only)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

erlingur@programming.dev

starman@programming.dev

Spyros@programming.dev

Our Vision for .NET 9 - .NET Blog (devblogs.microsoft.com)

submitted 9 months ago by canpolat@programming.dev to c/dotnet@programming.dev

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] RonSijm@programming.dev 4 points 9 months ago

But isn’t that a choice made by AWS (rather than Microsoft).

Well it's both, though my comment wasn't to blame Microsoft on this. But LTS is a relative, non-defined term. AWS has a policy to only support LTS versions because they (understandably) don't want to deal with new versions every couple of months. Within Microsoft terminology STS (Standard TS) is 18 months of patching, LTS is 36 months of patching.

So it's just semantics. dotnet-STS is not some goofy hobby language that gets new versions every couple of months. 18 months from a massive team with a massive userbase is pretty long term compared to some other frameworks.

So either AWS could not be so nitpicky about it not being labeled LTS - or Microsoft could just label one version (dotnet7, dotnet9) as LTS, and the 36 months version as Extra-LTS or whatever lol. And all the dotnet versions would fall within the AWS native-support parameters