I fail to understand why they feel the need to test their setup with the latest Alpine while at the same time using out of date and unsupported versions of .NET.

On the flip side, good debugging!

▲ andix 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I really don't get why people still bother with unsupported dotnet versions. There might be a few edge cases that prevent upgrading, but in 99% an upgrade from dotnet 3.1 to dotnet 10 is completely smooth.

Running in an unsupported dotnet version also means that there won't be any security patches. Not great.

▲ pjmlp 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Because in many companies that isn't a 5 second job changing a csproj file.

It requires clearance from management to spend actual money, measured in the amount of hours of work of everyone involved doing this times the hourly rate, to update every single configuration file, CI/CD build scripts, do a QA round on staging environment to validate everything is working as it was already before, to finally to production delivery, and tell everyone the new version is now greenlight for development.

Naturally having a security assessment that an upgrade is required is a good way to have that budget come to fruition.

	▲	andix 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I know that. But if you never upgrade, your project drowns in technical debt until the point where it only eats up money, and no changes can be implemented anymore.

▲ Dwedit 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Well there is "netstandard 2.0", which lets you target both .NET Framework 4.6.1+ and Dotnet 2.0+ with the same code.

	▲	andix 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		That usually involves some serious work to get done. Just upgrading to dotnet 8/9/10 is much easier.

▲ SideburnsOfDoom 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> in 99% an upgrade from dotnet 3.1 to dotnet 10 is completely smooth.

> Running in an unsupported dotnet version is not great

Uh, dotnet 10 is currently versioned "10.0.0-preview.7". It won't be released until November 2025. It's therefor 1) Not guaranteed smooth and 2) unsupported. Source: https://dotnet.microsoft.com/en-us/download/dotnet/10.0

Perhaps you mean .NET 9.

Yes, it's a smooth update in many scenarios.

▲ andix 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

.NET 10 is the next LTS version. It’s going to be released approximately in November and already quite stable. Now is the time to upgrade to 10, do some testing and then deploy once 10 is released. 9 is a non-lts version and 8 (LTS) is already 2 years old (you’ve lost 2 years of support already).

Edit: Microsoft officially supports .net release candidates for production use, the first RC is probably going to be released within the next few weeks.

	▲	SideburnsOfDoom a day ago \| parent [-]
		> It's going to be released approximately in November That's literally what I said, yes. The track record is very punctual so far, so "in the first half of November" is highly likely. > the first RC is probably going to be released within the next few weeks I made a statement about the way that things factually are at present. No less, no more. You characterised .NET 10 as a supported version, and this is not currently true. > Now is the time to upgrade to 10, do some testing and then deploy once 10 is released. Really "Now" ? or "probably within the next few weeks" when there's a version that is somewhat supported? My employer is not in the habit of deploying 2 months after the work is done. Nor are they in the habit of prioritising this pre-release over other more important work. They love .NET LTS releases when they are releases, but absolutely will not put a pre-release on production, no matter if it's "supported" in some sense. LTSs are for people or companies with low appetite for this kind of risk, or who have contractual obligations to not be running unsupported or pre-release software. Preview 7 is by definition not release quality yet, as it's not the release. I expect .NET 10 to get picked up by my employer in the new year. This is based on my experience with the update to .NET 8 Your way does seem to better in that you have capacity to trial pre-releases, but the long release cycle sounds sucky.

▲ orphea 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

  > Running in an unsupported dotnet version is not great

They meant netcoreapp3.1 and net5.0.

	▲	SideburnsOfDoom a day ago \| parent [-]
		Oh, sorry, I read "unsupported dotnet version" as "an unsupported dotnet version as of today", which incudes 10.0 preview 7.

▲ stackskipton 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Also, did not alpine work? Size difference between the two is 200MB which is probably insignificant for 99% of .Net users.

▲ gwbas1c 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Because often, somebody wrote something a few years ago and there isn't a business case to constantly upgrade every single dependency.