On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 14:19, Kjell Rilbe <kjell.ri...@datadia.se> wrote:
> So it's not an option to maintain a common 2.0 and 4.0 codebase.
It is an option. As well as we keep .NET 1.1 codebase alive. It's just
about time for maintanence vs. new features.
> Apparently it *is* possible to maintain a common 3.5 and 4.0 codebase,
Yes. 3.5 and 4.0 are closer than 2.0 and 4.0, so it's much easier.
> since that's what you said is your intention. So, are those language
> features available in 3.5 already?
What language features? You mean Func or L2O? Yes, these were
introduced in .NET 3.5/C#3.0.
> 3.0 too?
Nope.
> No matter what, I suggest again that you branch off a version for .Net
> 2.0, which would be kept alive for bugfixes but no new features. Poll
> your userbase a few times a year, and when interest in 2.0 support seems
> to have died off or it's judged to be very stable, stop maintaining it
> but keep it at the download site "as is".
>
> Would that be a good approach?
I don't know yet. That's why I'm asking and looking for feedback.
--
Jiri {x2} Cincura (CTO x2develop.com)
http://blog.cincura.net/ | http://www.ID3renamer.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Firebird-net-provider mailing list
Firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
