Hacker News Reader

Comment by phillipcarter | Hacker News Reader

The answer is to fix your processes, not demand Microsoft accommodate them. The lifecycles are already plenty long.

Any way you look at it 3 years is pretty low for industry standard LTS lifecycles. Besides the .NET Framework comparison Java LTS is 5-8 years.

Node (used at least as much as .NET and Java in enterprise) has a 3 year LTS cycle, so I don't know if it's really low for an industry standard.

    Node (used at least as much as .NET and Java in enterprise) has a 3 year LTS cycle

I'm gonna need a citation on that. From what I've seen, what enterprises have done any node adoption have fled it like rats fleeing a sinking ship because of all the problems it's had over the past half decade. To the point that shops I've worked with are moving back to Java.

It is quite clear on node's documentation.

https://github.com/nodejs/release#release-schedule

Pretty sure they are asking for a citation on the usage and not on the LTS schedule.

I've seen the opposite.

My issue is the cadences are difficult to work with.

Microsoft's general-ish LTS for .NET is 2 years. We also only seem to get a new release every 2 years. It's hard to handle breaking changes between two versions quickly.

LTS for .NET is 3 years, not two. There's a new LTS every 2 years, so you get a full year to move from LTS -> LTS if you need to.

What kind of breaking changes have been hard to handle?

None so far

Reply on news.ycombinator.com