Skip to content

Conversation

amcasey
Copy link
Member

@amcasey amcasey commented Aug 1, 2024

The dev experience should mostly match other platforms now, but I've added a section with caveats.

Firefox no longer seems to need special handling on Windows or macOS. I strongly suspect that section could also be removed in the pre-6.0 doc, but I haven't had a chance to confirm.

Context: dotnet/aspnetcore#56582


Internal previews

📄 File 🔗 Preview link
aspnetcore/security/docker-compose-https.md Hosting ASP.NET Core images with Docker Compose over HTTPS
aspnetcore/security/docker-https.md Hosting ASP.NET Core Images with Docker over HTTPS
aspnetcore/security/enforcing-ssl.md Enforce HTTPS in ASP.NET Core

The dev experience should mostly match other platforms now, but I've added a section with caveats.

Firefox no longer seems to need special handling on Windows or macOS.  Is strongly suspect that section could also be removed in the pre-6.0 doc, but I haven't had a chance to confirm.
@amcasey
Copy link
Member Author

amcasey commented Aug 1, 2024

@Rick-Anderson besides your usual wordsmithing, I think I'll probably need some help with versioning. The functionality has been merged in 9.0 and is a candidate for backporting to 8.0, but 6.0 will probably still need the old instructions. So maybe we need to split the post-6.0 section (by copy-pasting?) and then update it (at least the Firefox instructions are outdated).

@Rick-Anderson
Copy link
Contributor

@Rick-Anderson besides your usual wordsmithing, I think I'll probably need some help with versioning. The functionality has been merged in 9.0 and is a candidate for backporting to 8.0, but 6.0 will probably still need the old instructions. So maybe we need to split the post-6.0 section (by copy-pasting?) and then update it (at least the Firefox instructions are outdated).

One this merges I'll do another PR on versions. Normally we wouldn't mention what newer version can do, but in this case it's important because it's significant and motivation to update to .NET 9.

The .NET 9 version won't mention it requires .NET 9 or higher, but I'd like to mention that in earlier versions.

@Rick-Anderson
Copy link
Contributor

@amcasey see #33231 where I handle the versioning and #33230 where FF special case is removed.

@amcasey
Copy link
Member Author

amcasey commented Aug 1, 2024

The .NET 9 version won't mention it requires .NET 9 or higher, but I'd like to mention that in earlier versions.

@Rick-Anderson The backport to 8.0 has been approved, so it will be in a patch but people on older versions of 8.0 won't have it. How do you want to reflect that in the docs (if at all)?

Co-authored-by: Rick Anderson <[email protected]>
@amcasey
Copy link
Member Author

amcasey commented Aug 2, 2024

@Rick-Anderson Did I jump the gun on merging? I figured there was a publish step but it appears to be live. The new text won't be accurate until 9.0 RC1 and an 8.0 patch ship.

@Rick-Anderson
Copy link
Contributor

Rick-Anderson commented Aug 3, 2024

@Rick-Anderson Did I jump the gun on merging? I figured there was a publish step but it appears to be live. The new text won't be accurate until 9.0 RC1 and an 8.0 patch ship.

Nope, that was me. EDIT ha ha, it was you AFAIK I'll back that out until 9.0 RC1. #33247

@Rick-Anderson The backport to 8.0 has been approved, so it will be in a patch but people on older versions of 8.0 won't have it. How do you want to reflect that in the docs (if at all)?

Yes, I'll take care of that and let the 8.0 folks know what they need. Given .NET 8 is LTS, many customers are mandated to only deploy on LTS so that's important.

@tdykstra
Copy link
Contributor

tdykstra commented Sep 7, 2024

@amcasey @Rick-Anderson I'm not sure of the best way to proceed here given all the PRs that have been done up to the point this was reverted, but I'm inclined to think the best way to start is by reverting the PR that reverted this PR and then looking to see what additional changes need to be done. Does that make sense to you? If we didn't do that we would have to salvage manually a lot of changes from this PR, wouldn't we? I don't know if there will be merge conflicts if I do revert the revert PR.

@tdykstra tdykstra mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2024
tdykstra added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants