Raise minimum .NET version to 4.0

[nulltoken]

Are there any compelling reason to stay on .Net 3.5?
Are there, out in the wild, tools that depend on LibGit2Sharp and can not upgrade to .Net 4.0?

[nulltoken]

/cc @paulcbetts @psantosl @spraints @KindDragon @martinwoodward

[anaisbetts]

Make it So

[KindDragon]

This is ok for Git Extensions and probably for git-tfs too.

[phkelley]

I spoke with @ethomson and we are enthusiastic about this move. @jamill is on vacation this week though, in case he has any (I can't think of any reason why he would object, though.)

[spraints]

👍 git-tfs targets .net 4.0.

[psantosl]

We still release assemblies in 2.0 to be as backwards compatible as possible

Ruben, what do you think about moving the entire plastic client to 4 or only enable plastic GitSync with 4?

On 20/03/2014, at 21:47, "Matt Burke" <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

[:+1:] git-tfs targets .net 4.0.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/654#issuecomment-38219091.

[psantosl]

I'd like to move the whole client to 4, although we need to solve before some
compatibility issues.

We had already the same thoughts with other features that are only available for 4.0, but
we didn't move. Sooner or later we'll have to migrate the whole client :-)

On 3/20/2014 22:26, Pablo Santos wrote:

We still release assemblies in 2.0 to be as backwards compatible as possible

Ruben, what do you think about moving the entire plastic client to 4 or only enable
plastic GitSync with 4?

On 20/03/2014, at 21:47, "Matt Burke" <notifications@github.com
mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

👍 git-tfs targets .net 4.0.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#654 (comment).

.

[jamill]

👍

[martinwoodward]

@psantosl - let us know if moving LibGit2Sharp to 4.0 is going to cause you any blocking issues or not as it's looking like everyone else is 👍

[Aimeast]

I'd like fx 4.0 but not mandatory

[ericnewton76]

I would not recommend it. Until there's a core framework VM change, you're just encouraging 4.0 for syntax sugar in the code.

[nulltoken]

I would not recommend it.

@ericnewton76 Could you please elaborate about this? What would be the cons of migrating to 4.0?

[txdv]

People who use 3.5 are so ancient that they use CVS anyway.

[ericnewton76]

I would not recommend it because its easy to get 3.5 assemblies to run on 4.0+ but its much more difficult to get 4.0 assemblies to run in <4.0 without a lot of assembly reference "fixing".

Just sayin. I personally have all my projects on >=4.0