.NET 3.0 does NOT change .NET 2.0 libraries.

Recently a fellow MVP pointed out the addition of the TransferRequest method to the HttpServerUtility class.  The documentation falsely states it as being .NET 3.0 when in fact the change is made in .NET 3.5 Beta.

You’d think stating the file versions would be enough to clear up the matter, which is what I did.  I looked in some Virtual PCs to see what file version there were for System.Web, and determined that the change that includes TransferRequest was the 3.5 version.  Saddly one other MVP wanted to add in some FUD.  And that is really sad because people should know that 3.0 does NOT modify the 2.0 assemblies.  It is important that enterprises know they can safely rollout 3.0 without worrying about changes to the 2.0 framework.

 Here’s what I posted:

I just looked in some virtual PC’s, and the change is System.Web to

Prior to that, System.Web was 2.0.50727.210 as of KB922770 . Note:
Installing .NET 3.0 does NOT change that

The change to the 1318 minor version occurs with the install of .NET 3.5
Beta 1 bits.  Whether or not this will be the case with the final release of
3.5 I’m not sure.  I believe the changes are all non breaking so they may
just do that.

And here’s some of the comments another MVP made:

There’s a bunch of members in 3.0 which aren’t available in .Net 2.0

It would be *so* much easier for everybody if you documented your “facts”.

Did I miss the documentation you cited ?
Are you aware that *documenting* something goes beyond simply stating an assertion ?

Okay you can get the gist.  I state the versions and state I looked in VPC’s etc, and I get back some childish argument about that not equating to their sense of the meaning of “documented”.  I s’pose some people just like to argue and spread FUD. Sad.

So anyway, no matter what anyone else tells you, .NET 3.0 does not change the 2.0 assemblies. 

3.5 does but that’s another story 😉  I actually hope they will release 3.5 as 4.0 given all the *additions*.  If 3.0 deserved a new version number then 3.5 definitely does.  Plus changing the 2.0 libraries even if it is just to add new members really isn’t what one would expect of a minor version upgrade.

3 Comments so far

  1.   John on June 30th, 2007          


    I thought that 3.5 was shipping with 2.0 SP1. Perhaps that’s why the version number bumped?

  2.   Bill on June 30th, 2007          

    Hi John,

    Yes it does appear that way. I checked on a Windows 2008 public Beta which only has 2.0 installed, and it has the newer verion of System.Web. I believe Vista also comes with the same newer System.Web without 3.5.

    So yes it does look like a service pack or later release of 2.0. Installing 3.0 does not (at present) deliver that change, only installing 3.5 beta does. This of course only applies to OS’s that ship without the framework, XP and 2003 or earlier.

  3.   Daniel Moth on June 30th, 2007          

    Bill, 3.5 does not add to 3.0 and 2.0 anything (like you rightly pointed out that 3.0 didn’t add to 2.0).

    The changes are indeed the SP1 for 2.0 and the SP1 for 3.0. It just happens that their release coincides with v3.5.

    For a graphical version of this story and the complete list of changes see my blog.