For those curious, Microsoft went with the Apache 2 license: http://www.asp.net/open-source
Source code of ASP.NET
11–20 of 104 posts
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#12The URL of that link is a pretty surprising thing, in and of itself.
Parts of Microsoft have been using github for quite a while now: https://github.com/msopentech https://github.com/Azure The Azure SDK has been there since 2012. I agree that even now it still seems kind of odd when Microsoft embraces open source technologies, and the company is very big so their support tends to be oddly lumpy (generally better among the groups working on products that are directly related to network…
Reactive extensions too: https://github.com/Reactive-Extensions
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#13Oh, whoever did this is gonna be in big trouble. Heads are gonna roll.
…Hmm? What do you mean "they meant to do that"?
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#14Too little, too late (imo). I'll think about it again once they have visual studio and all the good things running on *.nix. It's too much of a pain to get anything to work with a .net project, and then deploy on anything other than IIS.
it's not even about visual studio.
It's about the fact that the whole .net framework is not opensource,thus forcing you to run windows server anyway.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#15Too little, too late (imo). I'll think about it again once they have visual studio and all the good things running on *.nix. It's too much of a pain to get anything to work with a .net project, and then deploy on anything other than IIS.
it's not even about visual studio. It's about the fact that the whole .net framework is not opensource,thus forcing you to run windows server anyway.
They've committed to working with mono to getting working well on there.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#16Too little, too late (imo). I'll think about it again once they have visual studio and all the good things running on *.nix. It's too much of a pain to get anything to work with a .net project, and then deploy on anything other than IIS.
Too little? Biggest change for ASP.NET from release of ASP.NET! "Too much of pain" was the first (and last) thing I said when trying to configure ruby on ubuntu. Or tried to download some app and run it.
same thing I said when trying to convert to .Net. Ruby on Ubuntu? easy peasy.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#17Too little, too late (imo). I'll think about it again once they have visual studio and all the good things running on *.nix. It's too much of a pain to get anything to work with a .net project, and then deploy on anything other than IIS.
I don't understand the thinking behind phrases like "too little, too late" about a company whose tooling will likely span the entire careers of a number of generations of developers.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#18Too little, too late (imo). I'll think about it again once they have visual studio and all the good things running on *.nix. It's too much of a pain to get anything to work with a .net project, and then deploy on anything other than IIS.
it's not even about visual studio. It's about the fact that the whole .net framework is not opensource,thus forcing you to run windows server anyway.
This entire version of ASP.NET is specifically about modularizing the stack and breaking it's dependence on IIS so it will work well with Mono + Apache and Nginx. That's quite literally why this version is being written, as aside from MVC, ASP.NET as an IIS interface technology has been feature complete for years and wasn't in line for any major changes.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#19Too little, too late (imo). I'll think about it again once they have visual studio and all the good things running on *.nix. It's too much of a pain to get anything to work with a .net project, and then deploy on anything other than IIS.
Visual Studio a) will never run on Unix, and b) is not required to do .NET development.
I know people who do their .NET work in Sublime Text with a nant build chain. It's not my preferred method, but it works great for them. Hell, I know a guy that uses ASP.NET to host an Angular app, and to unify his build system, he has Grunt pick up the heavy lifting of running his MSBuild files whenever he does the pre-deploy steps for his JavaScript.
If you think you need Visual Studio to do .NET development, it's because you fundamentally don't understand the technologies at play and just wanted to say something provocative and witty.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#20Too little, too late (imo). I'll think about it again once they have visual studio and all the good things running on *.nix. It's too much of a pain to get anything to work with a .net project, and then deploy on anything other than IIS.
Too little? Biggest change for ASP.NET from release of ASP.NET! "Too much of pain" was the first (and last) thing I said when trying to configure ruby on ubuntu. Or tried to download some app and run it.
I guess all those thousands of Rails apps running on Ubuntu had some kind of magic or secret knowledge to get that working. Going open source and posting some libs on Github is 'Huge'? That's kind of funny considering how much is out there, top notch, and did it way before MS did, and yet, it wasn't "huge" for them.