Jump to content

Talk:ASP.NET MVC

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 05:00, 28 August 2016 (Signing comment by Arsen.Shnurkov - "Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure licensing problem: new section"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

untitled

Article needs to have brief descriptions of what each release provided.--76.126.182.92 (talk) 08:33, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be update

The article should be updated because a lot has happened and the details about the view engines have changes. Razor is now the prefered view engine. Robert Sundström (talk) 22:10, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this statement is no longer accurate, as the wizards now default to the Razor view engines: "By default, the view engine in the MVC framework uses regular .aspx pages to design the layout of the user interface pages onto which the data is composed." 207.156.50.129 (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I link the thread title because an editor is apparently unclear what it means. Retitled § appropriately. 72.228.189.184 (talk) 01:35, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Subject term

Use of the word lightweight.

Subjective? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.237.64.150 (talk) 15:11, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

vNext will be mutli-platform

ASP.NET will be multi-platform since the vNext version.

It will be supported on Mac OS X, Linux and who knows.Shimmy (talk) 10:29, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure licensing problem

System.Web.Mvc.dll references System.Web.WebPages.dll

System.Web.WebPages.dll references Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure.dll

Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure.dll comes with Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure.nupkg package: (Unable to uninstall 'Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure 1.0.0.0' because 'Microsoft.AspNet.WebPages 3.2.3' depends on it)


Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure's source code was not published on CodePlex, it's license is Microsoft EULA.

So, one can't build Asp.NET MVC from sources (or at least he will be forced to bring binary .nupkg with binary code build by third party) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsen.Shnurkov (talkcontribs) 04:59, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]