Consider putting Ubuntu interim releases under "Other"

[richlander]

Type of issue

Other (describe below)

Description

The idea is that only LTS releases (which would satisfy the vast majority of users) would be displayed prominently.

Context: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/install/linux-ubuntu-install?tabs=dotnet9&pivots=os-linux-ubuntu-other

Page URL

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/install/linux-ubuntu-install

Content source URL

https://github.com/dotnet/docs/blob/live/docs/core/install/linux-ubuntu-install.md

Document Version Independent Id

e7286112-86cf-8d6a-655b-ee851f396d15

Article author

@adegeo

Metadata

• ID: 72799d86-e122-1706-18a2-d0bfde699bfc
• Service: dotnet-fundamentals
• Sub-service: install

---

Associated WorkItem - 487051

[adegeo]

@richlander Why would this be beneficial? Eventually it makes its way to "Other" once it's out of support. If someone gets here for a currently in support version and notices there isn't a tab, they may not even click Other. Isn't it better to just show all versions currently in support and thus more likely to have fresh installs that need directions?

[richlander]

Someone asked me for help installing on Ubuntu. They had 24.04. They got into a confused state because they were looking at the 24.10 instructions. It is easy to do. I am glad we have 24.10 instructions but they aare for a small user group. "Other" doesn't need to mean EOL. Also, EOL is difficult to define given that there are extended support plans. I'd like the last two LTS versions prominently and put all others behind a link.

[adegeo]

@richlander I don't see how that would mean that the latest version should be hidden from the version selector. That same scenario could have happened between two LTS versions and the user. We can't really prevent people from being in the wrong section and ignoring the headers, page title, and other text that tells them they're in the wrong section.

Canonical came through last month and actually removed 24.10 (as it's out of support) and added 25.04 to the doc.

The feedback system has a negative review left by a user complaining that 25.04 is missing from the page, a few days prior to the update from Canonical. I think that removing active ("normal" support I guess) versions just opens up an avenue for complaints and confusion.

What do you think about adding links to the other supported versions next to the install instructions? Perhaps this would help people pivot at the last minute?

[richlander]

Good insight. Perhaps I'm wrong about my initial suggestion.

How about this:

• Keep the versioning in the selector ordered as-is (newest first).
• Delete standard release versions (like 23.10) as soon as they go EOL.
• Delete LTS versions when they are no longer supported by any supported .NET release.

[richlander]

@dviererbe

[dviererbe]

Someone asked me for help installing on Ubuntu. They had 24.04. They got into a confused state because they were looking at the 24.10 instructions.

This actually happened just this week to a user, see dotnet/sdk#50551 (comment)

@richlander I think we should change the order of the version selector to oldest (supported) version first, which is always guaranteed to be an Ubuntu LTS. This way, if people do not read the title correctly, the worst case is that they run sudo add-apt-repository ppa:dotnet/backports.

This is currently not great, because apt update will complain that the PPA has no release file¹, but I should be able to fix this².

¹ We only upload packages for Ubuntu LTS versions to this PPA, so Launchpad never generates a release file for interim versions.
² I can upload a random package to the PPA for the Ubuntu interim releases, which will force Launchpad to generate a release file. Afterwards I delete the package and Launchpad should keep an empty release, therefore apt update will no longer complain about a missing release file.

[richlander]

I think we should change the order of the version selector to oldest (supported) version first

I think that's a good idea.