Having promised that there would be no further progress, Microsoft has ruled out a launch candidate for the next .NET Core 3.0 framework.
The broadcast occurs before the expected launch of the platform in the .NET Conf next week in Birmingham.
It's a bit surprising for developers who were told that preview 9 would be the last one before things got to General Availability. However, the gang did not consider the Visual Studio team plans and Visual Studio Preview 4 16.3. Therefore, another version is required to accommodate the changes.
Citing "technical and historical reasons," Richard Lander of the .NET team explained that the .NET toolkit (compilers and others) is duplicated between Visual Studio and the .NET Core SDK. Since changes were made to that toolkit for Preview 4, the .NET Core SDK required an update.
"We could have launched a new .NET Core SDK and only delivered it through Visual Studio," Lander said.
"However, we have broken people in the past (now distant) with that approach."
And nobody likes to be broken.
Microsoft has continued to insist that the preview (now in RC1 form) is ready for production and we will support it. However, with version 3.1 just around the corner in November, it might be worth waiting until the first problem has been fixed.
.NET Core 3.0 is, after all, an impressive leap from the last major version, .NET Core 2.2, and it would be reasonable to expect some initial problems.
As expected, .NET Core 3.0 RC1 joined the Entity Framework Core 3.0 and Entity Framework 6.3 Release Candidates after sufficient changes were made to "justify the release of a launch candidate version."
There were a couple of notable adjustments for EF Core with the vendor's completion in memory and improved compilation performance.
Like .NET Core 3.0, the gang is now looking for more than what is needed in the 3.1 release as the general availability of version 3.0 is coming. Diego Vega, Program Manager for .NET Data Access, thanked the taxpayers and warned: "Although any major error reported at this stage probably does not reach 3.0, we will consider it for 3.1".
So there. ®