ASP.NET MVC, Web API, Razor and Open Source

http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2012/03/27/asp-net-mvc-web-api-razor-and-open-source.aspx

by johns • 14 years ago

225 100 14 years ago

weblogs.asp.net

DrJokepu• 14 years ago

This is really great news. Open sourcing Razor means that it can be shipped with Mono, so the awkward getting-razor-working-with-mono rituals won't be necessary in the future.

acak2• 14 years ago

Indeed - in fact they reached out to Miguel to submit a pull request. :-]

http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ASPNETMVC4ASPNETWebAPIAndASPNE...

obtino• 14 years ago

It's good to see that it's been released under the Apache License: http://aspnetwebstack.codeplex.com/license

noveltyaccount3• 14 years ago

Also they're using Git, which is HN approved :)

acak2• 14 years ago

I am a developer who has leaned towards .NET over the last few projects and one of the things that used to nag me is that the platform is a closed one (and the licensing fees can be a decent part of the cost). I was fairly certain I would migrate off it if the project ever took off seriously.

And after seeing the C# love on HN on the poll for favorite programming languages last week, I realized there must be many enamored .NET programmers who would use and evangelize it more but only don't due to it being a closed platform.

Also, a lot of us have great ideas to make the platform we're using better - and with Microsoft announcing they'd make Json.NET, a third party JSON library, the default JSON serializer over their home-grown DataContractJsonSerializer in the next version of ASP.NET MVC, I wondered if Microsoft was considering the unthinkable: start accepting community developed features into their platform, and perhaps open source it to make the scope for community contributions even larger.

There's a long way to go to fully realize this vision (I'd like for .NET itelf to be open source ;-] ), but this is just incredible news.

For those who want to understand which parts of the ASP.NET stack are open source, check out this diagram on Hanselman's blog that was very useful to me.

http://www.hanselman.com/blog/VisualStudio11BetaInContext.as...

cameronh90• 14 years ago

> Microsoft announcing they'd make JSON.NET, a third party JSON library, the default JSON serializer over their home-grown DataContractJsonSerializer in the next version of ASP.NET MVC

Finally! For those who haven't used it, DataContractJsonSerializer has the most absurd way of serialising dictionaries into JSON. Rather than producing {"k1": "v1", "k2": "v2"} it produces [{"Key": "k1", "Value": "v1"}, {"Key":"k2", "Value": "v2"}]

JamesNK• 14 years ago

> DataContractJsonSerializer has the most absurd way of serialising dictionaries into JSON.

DataContractJsonSerializer is a hack that is built on top of an XML parser.

For the people who are unfamiliar with .NET there is a comparison of Json.NET to Microsoft's two JSON serializers here:

http://json.codeplex.com/ <- Json.NET homepage

lusr3• 14 years ago

For a big old school company like Microsoft to accept patches from the community is huge. I always grudgingly accepted there must be some sort of commercial risk ("Microsoft used my code and made 10 million dollars, now I'm going to sue them") holding them back.

Does anybody have insight on this topic? I'm currently building something that would benefit greatly from user contributions of code, but I'm wary about the legal implications (the project will be a commercial site, and while I have no problem publishing their code if I choose to integrate it into my site to enhance the user experience, I have no interest in publishing the core code for the rest of the site).

ConstantineXVI• 14 years ago

I'd pay to have a fully compatible .NET stack on OSX/Linux. Most of our backend code is C#; outside of having to use Windows I've actually found it very pleasant to work with. No need for a full MSVS port, just a working VM/library and build tools (+ maybe an IntelliSense daemon to plug into editors). It'd be interesting to see MS get back to their roots this way.

gecko4• 14 years ago

I'm completely with you: I absolutely love .NET, but I really wish that I could write server-side components for and on OS X or Linux. Mono's getting less painful for server-side work, for what it's worth; if you have light needs, or can easily restart the service on a regular basis, you may find it usable. But I'd definitely avoid deploying an MVC 3 app.

funkah• 14 years ago

I think .NET is great, and most of my career has been working in C#, but targeting Windows and developing on Windows is just a bummer.

josephcooney4• 14 years ago

mono

zinssmeister• 14 years ago

this is awesome news for the .Net community.

jroseattle3• 14 years ago

> start accepting community developed features into their platform

Guthrie has done a great job of making developers on the Windows platform feel included and involved. While Microsoft's product offerings slip, Guthrie continues to grow the community of developers, maybe not in quantity but most certainly in quality. Before Guthrie, an offering like today's announcement never would have seen the light of day.

jinushaun• 14 years ago

I'm not too familiar with what Guthrie has done for the .NET community, but Hanselman is a famous proponent of open source and making .NET as fun to code in as ruby and python. His coming to MS has changed the way I look at the .NET stack.

jroseattle3• 14 years ago

Yeah ScottH has done a great job. ScottG hired him, plus a bunch of other community advocates over the past few years. Some have since moved on, but MS really did a great job of listening to devs who build on MS platforms.

Michiel• 14 years ago

And let's not forget Phil Haack (http://haacked.com), who is now working at GitHub. He used to be the program manager at Microsoft for ASP.NET MVC, the first part of the ASP.NET framework to be released under an open source license.

facorreia• 14 years ago

Microsoft product offerings slip how? What I see is outstanding products being delivered such as Windows Azure, Windows Server 8, SQL Server 2012, System Center 2012.

jroseattle3• 14 years ago

More on the consumer side, not the data center.

rufugee3• 14 years ago

I would consider paying for .net if it received first class treatment on Linux. As someone who has lived through the pain of hosting apps on Windows, I just refuse to do it in the future. I'd love to see Microsoft bring Mono into the fold and truly bring it to the level of the Windows .net implementation.

dos12• 14 years ago

What part of hosting apps on Windows was painful to you? I actually prefer to host my apps in Windows when I'm able and the technology stack supports it. I don't need to set up new apps often, but when I do, it's many orders of magnitude faster for me to get an app running on Windows vs. Linux.

Linux works great as a server OS once I get everything set up and configured correctly. I never need to think about it again. However, I dread having to set things up on a new Linux machine. There's always some hardware that doesn't install correctly or some config file that needs twiddling. Sometimes it takes an odd sequence of commands that needs to be run in just the right order to get things going. Invariably I waste hours on the internet searching forums every time I do this, getting more and more frustrated the whole time.

As far as Windows hosting goes, I find IIS 7 to be much easier to set up and customize than Apache in terms of hosting web applications. I find the uptime of Windows Server boxes to be functionally equivalent to their Linux counterparts. I also find it's much easier to administrate large groups of Windows servers because of the nice tooling. Things like Active Directory, SMS and SCOM make things pretty easy.

rufugee3• 14 years ago

I currently run a company (on the IT side) with 100+ servers...a healthy mix of both Windows and Linux. To write-up the benefits I see of Linux over Windows would take a fairly long blog post...perhaps I'll do that soon. However, I will say that the last time I had a Linux hardware problem which wasn't related to a display driver issue (and in other words, not on the server) was in 2006. Our Linux servers are reliable, easily configured (admittedly....we know what we're doing) and have very high up times. Contrast that with our Windows servers which at this point we've had to resort to weekly reboot Windows to keep them performing.

Personally, I also find it much easier to find help online with Linux when things do go wrong...and that Microsoft (wisely) makes the whole experience very painful unless you're willing to pony up for their more expensive "tiers" of software. As an example, even though DFS-R is included in Windows Server, try managing a real, live deployment given what you're provided with just Server. Unless you purchase SCOM, your will fail.

matwood2• 14 years ago

Sometimes it takes an odd sequence of commands that needs to be run in just the right order to get things going. Invariably I waste hours on the internet searching forums every time I do this, getting more and more frustrated the whole time.

I have found this to be the case for any system that I've had to deal with for a decent amount of time. Simply change odd sequence of commands to odd registry changes (or xml files in IIS), or click these random guis and see if it works. One thing I like about the linux CLI though is that generally once I find the command it really does work.

jbester• 14 years ago

There are a couple use cases: 1) applications where the OS is a commodity - abstraction layer to IO (disk, network). MS solution is their PAAS (which is expensive). 2) existing libraries/services that aren't available on Win32 where it is hard to justify another server license just for .NET - this factors in to where I work; some code can't be .NET as there is already a Linux server in the setup. We've ended up with 80% dotnet and 20% python 3) most companies loathe mixing server OSs; some shops have fallen into the MS camp and others the FOSS camp 4) The proof that they aren't going to cannibalize existing OS/SQL License sales is in your comment

rbanffy8• 14 years ago

> I dread having to set things up on a new Linux machine

That's what Puppet, Chef, package management and a host of other tools such as virtual machine images and unattended installs are for.

> There's always some hardware that doesn't install correctly

Most server-grade hardware you buy from reputable sources is exquisitely Linux-compatible. I never had any problem with that.

> it takes an odd sequence of commands that needs to be run in just the right order to get things going

This indicates you are deploying servers without really understanding what you are doing. Your phrase evokes a series of spells that have to be cast in order to conjure the proper demons. Unix machines simply don't work like that - there is no magic.

> Invariably I waste hours on the internet searching forums every time I do this

Buy a good book, read and understand the documentation of the software you use. Hire an experienced consultant to teach you and your team, if needed.

When you understand what you are doing, it is really easy. Every piece is open to inspection and all you need to do is look inside.

> I find IIS 7 to be much easier to set up and customize than Apache in terms of hosting web applications.

Until you need to do something the GUI doesn't allow you to do.

> I also find it's much easier to administrate large groups of Windows servers because of the nice tooling

The tooling is there - you just need to learn it. We use Puppet where I work and we use it to manage our server fleet. Works as intended.

physicslover• 14 years ago

I used the .net stack for 8 years. But, I wouldn't use the platform for a startup or my own projects. I don't want to be locked into the Windows platform. Mainly, because of licensing fees and just a general preference for the Linux shell and its scripting environment.

The open source community isn't very strong so there aren't as many options for a lot of things, and the community has relied on Microsoft to provide most of the tools and libraries.

Also, while C# is a nice language, I don't find it that different that it compels me to use it over other options available elsewhere. Personally, I find F# to be a much more compelling product.

stevear• 14 years ago

Also worthy to note that Microsoft's BizSpark program provides free production access to Microsoft tools and products-- not Express editions but versions like Visual Studio Ultimate, SQL Server Enterprise, Windows Server Enterprise, etc. You also get a couple thousand free hours on Azure if you want to go that route. For training you also get three months of Pluralsight which brings you up to speed on the relevant tools and platforms.

I feel it's a really good time to be a Microsoft developer. The products are really solid, the skills are in demand and the barrier to entry is pretty much gone.

I realize after writing the above I come off as a big time evangelist, but this is only because I have had such a good experience for the last decade building on their platforms. Never regretted going all in other than sometime feeling like a black sheep on this site. Good to know there are a lot of other .Net folk on this site. ;)

vyrotek• 14 years ago

Yep. Our startup has been in the program for a little under 3 years now. It is great!

Edit - May I ask why the downvote? Would you like more information on my experience or something? I only attempted to validate that this is a real program with real companies going through it.

gfodor4• 14 years ago

Wait until the bill comes.

untog2• 14 years ago

The program lasts for three years. Something to consider, sure, but three years can be a long time in startup-land.

lancefisher• 14 years ago

After three years, you get to keep some production licenses as well as all the software you downloaded for free. You get four Windows Servers and two SQL Servers. This really is a great program. You can read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/About/Graduation.aspx

noveltyaccount3• 14 years ago

The most expensive part of a software project is the people, not the licenses. People who pay for MS believe that they're saving money in the long run.

fooooobar2• 14 years ago

Your product-name dropping skills are unparalleled.

notJim• 14 years ago

I had a hell of a time trying to actually use the ASP.Net MVC sourcecode on a project a while ago. The problem was that while my own project compiled fine, many of the dependencies I was using were built against a signed version of the ASP.NET MVC DLL. Since the version of the DLL I was using wasn't signed (with Microsoft's key), those dependencies wouldn't work against the version I was compiling. If you compile everything from source, this isn't a problem, but I had a number of dependencies that had been distributed as DLLs, and for reasons now obscure to me (but likely due to time pressures), I wasn't able to replace all those dependencies with source.

I guess the moral of the story is that if you're in .Net land and want to take advantage of this, make sure you do everything with source from the get-go.

edwinnathaniel9• 14 years ago

I'm a long time Java developer who recently move to .NET. What I love about Java when it comes to this particular issue: open source, is how easy it is to get the source code, documentation, and to navigate around given 2 assumptions:

1) You're using Maven + Eclipse (haven't tried in other IDE)

2) The source code is available (in most cases, they are) in Maven repository

Here's a simple example: I'm using Spring and Guava and occasionally I'd like to navigate to the method I use. All I have to do is hit F3 on the method call and Maven will download the source code JAR (and the documentation JAR as well) and voila: I can easily see the source code and navigate around. Ditto with the dependency of the dependency.

I have to say that Maven + Eclipse provide massive productivity increase for me and my team.

Now, I did .NET in the past briefly back when .NET was in 2.0/3.0 era. I recalled it wasn't obvious how to associate even the core .NET library (Collections, etc) via VS.NET.

How easy it is to achieve a similar workflow in .NET these days?

ghiculescu• 14 years ago

Resharper can do the same: http://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/

edwinnathaniel9• 14 years ago

ReSharper can download source code over the internet or do I have to setup things manually? put them in the right place, etc?

chazandchaz• 14 years ago

I can't believe all the .net love lately.

jackfoxy• 14 years ago

I've been strictly in management for a few years now, but I like to lead from the front, i.e. know the technology. It would be painful to trade in C# for Java and VS for Eclipse. Today I took a quick look at Scala and Clojure. I think F# for either of those is also not a good trade. There are a lot of things MS does right. The more MS opens up their technology, the better.

edwinnathaniel9• 14 years ago

That is strange. I'm the other way around: it is painful for me and my team to switch Java/Eclipse/Maven to C#/VS.NET/NuGET since NuGET isn't even close to Maven.

Not to mention we have to deal with licensing, buying software tools, etc while in Java land almost all the high quality tools are free, easy to download, easy to install.

Setting up a new machine is a breeze with SVN/GIT + Maven. A breeze.

untog2• 14 years ago

NuGet vs Maven seems like a small issue when compared to VS vs Eclipse or even C# vs Java. In the latter two, MS wins hands down. I can cope with NuGet.

fooooobar2• 14 years ago

You don't like Scala, Clojure, (after only looking at it today) or F#, and you think you 'know the technology'? That's not at all surprising coming from an MS supporter.

tathagatadg• 14 years ago

I've not written code on windows for years now, but today for started off with a .NET project - for an course assignment (.NET mandatory). I wasn't that bad - looks things can be completed fast enough here, however kept feeling itchy all the time that finally saying yes to closed source platform ... Came back home and now its open source. Thank you!

zentechen5• 14 years ago

> I am a developer who has leaned towards .NET over the last few projects and one of the things that used to nag me is that the platform is a closed one (and the licensing fees can be a decent part of the cost). I was fairly certain I would migrate off it if the project ever took off seriously.

Can you explain why? Is it because the only reason it's closed? You just hate MS.

zentechen5• 14 years ago

Reasons for down vote? Coward.

zentechen5• 14 years ago

So all people who use Oracle database would also abandon Oracle since it's close source?

tlianza• 14 years ago

What will be interesting to see is how well Microsoft acts as a steward of the project. I can't count how many bugs I've seen on Microsoft Connect sit untouched for years.

Assuming they're not being fixed due to lack of development resources, perhaps this will help. If it's any other reason, including test resources, management resources, or overall project priorities - a move like this is unlikely to be significant.

If we're just trading a list of ignored bug reports for a list of ignored pull requests, it'd be difficult to muster much excitement.

zentechen5• 14 years ago

Way too many Microsoft haters. BE OPEN MINDED. C# is a tool, like computer, as long as used to solve real world problems, who cares who's behind it? It's like how Apple fanboys are saying Object-C is the most awesome programming language in the world, totally biased.

zentechen5• 14 years ago

Down voted as expected. Hater, identify yourself or be a coward.

ittan• 14 years ago

This is a good sign of things to come. Changes at Microsoft?

eblackburn• 14 years ago

I wonder if Phil Haack's exodus was the straw that broke the camels back? Perhaps this was just the leverage Scott Guthurie required to finally get what that team has craved for some time?

josephcooney4• 14 years ago

I wish they'd open-source WPF, so at least if they won't fix the performance issues with it I could fix them myself (or at least coerce someone with enough skill to fix them for me).

ksajadi• 14 years ago

Meh.

prezjordan• 14 years ago

Looking for some HN insight here. I'm still a college student interested in startups. However, microsoft products really don't excite me. Can someone explain the benefits of C# to a Ruby on Rails coder?

gecko4• 14 years ago

Good parts: C#, and the entire .NET stack, completely skewers Ruby from a performance perspective, while not putting your coding in a straight jacket like Java does. You'll also find what in my opinion are vastly more powerful debugging and profiling tools, awesome threading support (be sure to check out both C# 4.5's async/await keywords and the existing Rx library at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/data/gg577609), better versioning, better IDEs if you're into that kind of thing, and more.

Downsides: While this is gradually changing, I don't consider server-side Mono production-ready, so you'll be both developing and deploying on Windows. Deploying on Windows may prove expensive, but BizSpark (http://www.crunchbase.com/product/bizspark) will let you avoid that well past the point where you should either be successful or have VC, making it a non-issue. The community isn't as library-happy as the Ruby community, although that's definitely changing; one side-effect of that is that, where Microsoft anticipated your needs, life is beautiful, but where they haven't, things can get painful.

I'd see my previous answer to this question at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3405362 too.

MatthewPhillips• 14 years ago

> better IDEs if you're into that kind of thing, and more.

With the caveat being you have to be into that kind of thing. Coding C# not-in VS (or MonoDevelop) is not fun.

thisishugo• 14 years ago

* C# is statically typed and compiled, which means a lot of problems the would be runtime errors in a Ruby on Rails project will be caught before deployment at compile-time.

* Being compiled also means theres a lower overhead to running C# code - there's no interpreter overhead.

* Anecdotally, many large sites (e.g. Twitter) that used the Rails stack have complained that the technology behind the site caused problems when they grew. Conversely, Stack Overflow, a large site using the ASP.net stack has never complained that C# was a problem in their growth. Correlation not causation, maybe, or perhaps the "Rails doesn't scale" mantra came about for a reason.

* Visual Studio is probably hand down the best IDE out there with good reason - Microsoft is heavily incentivised to keep developers using the Microsoft stack so making it hard or undesirable to abandon their development environment is important for it.

ASP.NET MVC, Web API, Razor and Open Source

Related Stories