Docs: Retire topic: Packages, Metapackages and Frameworks

[mairaw]

Topic URL: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/articles/core/packages

Comments on this topic indicate that people are confused and they don't understand the terminology used and the concepts introduced.

[DaRosenberg]

Indeed. I think the main sources of confusion are:

• the meaning of the word "framework"
• the distinction between "framework" and "package based framework"
• above all, the apparent circular definition, how can a framework both define and be defined by the set of packages which target it

The concepts of "package" and "metapackage" I believe are clear to most.

[majkinetor]

That topic needs serious and complete rewrite. It is the serious problem that the basics can't be outlined right.

[garfbradaz]

Agree wholeheartedly. We now have .NET Framework, .NET Core and now .NET Standards. To make matters worse, we now can reference bits and pieces of these together. My head hurts reading the above link.

[AmirHasanzade]

The first time I read the article I was confused. But after reading docs for .NET standard (and the fact that it's just a definition of APIs and not an implementation) and article about deployment methods for .NET core I was able to understand the article.

Maybe it's better if some prerequisite material is defined at first. Or if a metaphor (like the LEGO metaphor in comments) is added to make it clearer.

[mairaw]

@tdykstra another one related to the terminology work

[DaRosenberg]

@AmirHasanzade Metaphors rarely make technical concepts more understandable IMO, and the LEGO metaphor suggested by that comment is particularly vague and misaligned with what it tries to describe. Better IMO to explain the concepts in terms of what they really are, but clearly and exhaustively.

[IEvangelist]

Retire existing confusing doc. @tdykstra