if you want compare NH with EF, in some way, you need at least EF4 (running on .net4)
-- Fabio Maulo El 14/10/2010, a las 01:40, Julian <[email protected]> escribió: > You've raised a good point. So who do we want to make happy? If NH > doesn't make anybody happy, it will be consigned to obscurity by > Entity Framework. > > On Oct 14, 12:33 pm, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: >> I don't want see a single #ifdef inside NH sources. >> Here, in Argentina, I know at least a big company where the tech department >> have not approved the usage of .NET3.5... well they must be happy with >> NH2.1.2 >> If the company where you are working can't approve the usage of .NET4 >> well... you must be happy with NH3.0.x or you have to find somebody to >> maintain NH3.0 for you. >> >> Make happy everybody is outside NH scope. >> >> -- >> Fabio Maulo >> >> El 13/10/2010, a las 18:34, Diego Mijelshon <[email protected]> >> escribió: >> >> I understand the concerns. >> Still, I'd like to point out a few things that put us in a better position >> this time: >> - We can have VS2010 as a requirement for NH _development_, but still >> produce 3.5 assemblies (VS2010 finally has _real_ multitargeting). Maybe we >> can switch versions with a small script. >> - The differences between .NET 3.5 and .NET 4.0 are limited to a couple >> files that might reference ISet<T> (unless we start messing with dynamic and >> things like that). >> >> That's for the technical side... >> Now, if _only_ 50% of the users want to target .NET 4, it means the other >> half are still on 3.5, which means it should still be supported (again, >> maybe NH 4 can change that, but only if NH 3 is supported until most >> developers are using .NET 4) >> >> Diego >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 12:52, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: >>> To community. >>> If there is a lesson learned in the past of NHibernate is that we (team) >>> can't maintain not only two mayor versions for long time, but even we can't >>> maintain two set of solutions (VS2008, VS2010 for example). >> >>> Perhaps we can try again but I'm inclined to think that it will be not >>> possible, we have suffered it from VS2003(net1.1) to VS2005 (net2.0) and we >>> then avoid to suffer the same from VS2005 (net2.0) to VS2008 (net3.5), I'm >>> inclined to avoid it again. >> >>> This is OSS and who want maintain an old NH version can do it without any >>> kind of problems at list from our side (team). >> >>> We can't stop the evolution. NET4 is out there since long time and in a >>> poll we saw 50% of users voting to have NH3 pointing .NET4. >>> We will follow the evolution with courage and without pay a high cost for >>> back-draw compatibility. >> >>> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> Hi *team*. >> >>>> You have around 30 days to talk with people to have some ideas about what >>>> each one is thinking about NH next. >>>> The main matter is not about improvements, features or issues in general >>>> but about the "other" big JUMP. >>>> Perhaps after 3.0.0, this time, we may wait a little bit before open the >>>> 3.x branch and start developing NH4... >>>> Perhaps we have to plan only a little minor release after 3.0.0GA... >>>> something like one month or month and half to release 3.0.1 with some bug >>>> fix. >> >>>> Personally I would release NH4.0.0 very quickly with one mayor >>>> change: Remove Iesi.Collection (sig) for external usage... >>>> That mean (phase1): >>>> 1) a separated ICollectionTypeFactory for back draw compatibility and to >>>> give the opportunity to convert existing projects >>>> 2) Adios no strongly typed <set> (no Iesi ? well... only the ISet<T> will >>>> be supported) >>>> 3) The <set> will mean .Net4 ISet<T> by default >>>> 4) No more support for .NET3.5 >> >>>> (phase2) >>>> After NH4.0.0 we can start the real hard work but it will be "only" >>>> internal... the remotion of the reference to Iesi.Collection >>>> We may walk some others routes but I prefer a drastic cut instead a long >>>> torture. >> >>>> During phase2 I would implements some others ideas but that will be matter >>>> of appropriate discussions. >> >>>> The other possibility is to give support to both (Iesi and .Net) >>>> ISet differentiating it through a specific <type>... in any case it mean: >>>> bye bye .NET3.5 >> >>>> Please try to avoid a quick answer and take your time to "digest" the >>>> matter. >> >>>> -- >>>> Fabio Maulo >> >>> -- >>> Fabio Maulo
