WTF? Whose brilliant idea was this?May18
5/18/2011 7:21 AM
Did you just take a dump on standard versioning practices?
Original source: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/endpoint/archive/2011/04/18/microsoft-net-framework-4-platform-update-1.aspx
Who was the genius that thought calling a 4.x update a “Platform Update 1” and referencing the knowledgebase would ever be a good idea? Does that person actually understand what he/she is doing?
WTF happened to calling things by Major/Minor version? As if the Client Profile wasn’t already a really stupid idea, now you come out with this crap.
Why are you messing people around like this? You realize some of us actually write software and deal with deployments?
Posted 05-18-2011 1:37 PM by Hadi Hariri
In following the link to the original, original source, I discovered a complicated mess of, for machines targeting X, you must install Y, etc. etc.
To configure .NET Framework 4 Platform Update 1 on computers with Visual Studio 2010 SP1 that are going to be used to develop applications that target the functionality in the platform update, install Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Platform Update 1 – Design-time Package for Visual Studio 2010 SP1 (KB2495593).
To configure a computer on which applications that target the .NET Framework 4 Platform Update 1 are to be deployed, deploy Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Platform Update 1 (KB2478063) and the appropriate version of the .NET Framework 4.
- If the application targets .NET Framework 4 Client Profile Platform Update 1 (KB2478063), you must also deploy either:
- If the application targets .NET Framework 4 Platform Update 1 (KB2478063), you must also deploy:
That's just the little bit detailing what you need to be able to deploy your app. For development, it's more complex. Read the article for details. I think it would have been far preferable to have simply rolled these changes into the next minor version update, .Net 4.x, and let it go at that. Now, we developers have to worry about multiple .Net Framework "profiles". What a PITA.