Not all of ASP.NET though...notably absent: Web Forms.
Source code of ASP.NET
21–30 of 104 posts
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#22Not all of ASP.NET though...notably absent: Web Forms.
Yeah, I noticed that too. It would seem that my co-worker who thinks MVC is a fad is at odds with MS themselves.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#23Too 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 think Hudo's point is that experience with technologies is subjective. I loathe Windows after having been comfortable in terminal, and I loathe Eclipse after having been comfortable in VS.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#24Too 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.
because some people just like to complain and hate.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#25Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#26Too 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 ste…
The only reason I bring up Visual Studio is because most people don't even see the world out side of that IDE. "If it's not MS and it's not possible inside of Visual Studio it doesn't exist." That's how a whole lot of .NET developers, and .NET houses work -- and so that leads to my comment on VS.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#27Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#28Is this admission that codeplex is dead?
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#29Is this admission that codeplex is dead?
I don't think so, the ASP.NET team has been releasing code to github for while. same as azure, most of their SDK was released to github,
I don't think there is a mandate for all MS project to be on codeplex which is somewhat surprising.
Re: Source code of ASP.NET
#30Too 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.
I say that a lot and I feel like .NET is loosing relevance. Embracing open source and making Linux a first-class citizen in the eco system would be the only way for .NET to increase adoption or stay technologically relevant, and unfortunately its happening too slow.