James Kovacs - All Comments

re: Extreme ASP.NET Makeover – Getting Your House in Order

james.kovacs — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 05:40:28 GMT

@Mark - Yes, I would agree. Programming in XML is generally awful. I would have preferred to to use psake for the article, but it wasn't possible for non-technical reasons.

re: Extreme ASP.NET Makeover – Getting Your House in Order

Mark Pawelek — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:35:55 GMT

Tools using xml programming languages are daft.

(N)Ant, Cruise-Control, xslt, MS-build - the designers of those tools should committed to the mad-house where they belong ... or, even better, should be forced to read a book on user interface design.

I think this PSake tool sounds like a great idea. I shall be using it forthwith.

re: Extreme ASP.NET Makeover – Getting Your House in Order

Martin Evans — Mon, 11 May 2009 09:16:04 GMT

Hi James,

I've just read your opening article and have found it really interesting. I think "Brown-field" developments are more widely undertaken than people think.

I'll be following this series with some interest and would welcome your thoughts on the comparison between Nant and MS-Build at some point.

re: Ultimate Developer Rig - Kovacs Edition

Anand — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:17:22 GMT

Is there any value in buying a Corei7 based system? I intend to use it for daily tasks and multitasking. No gaming.

Anand

Coffee and Code coming to Durham Region!

Chris Charabaruk Online — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 18:00:35 GMT

Image by kungfootv via Flickr

Using Ruby and Rake with ASP.NET

Derek Morrison — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:01:12 GMT

Using Ruby and Rake with ASP.NET

MIX09 Videos, Oslo, Cloud Memory and More « Tales from a Trading Desk

MIX09 Videos, Oslo, Cloud Memory and More « Tales from a Trading Desk — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:36:59 GMT

Pingback from MIX09 Videos, Oslo, Cloud Memory and More « Tales from a Trading Desk

re: MSDN Magazine Series: From Web Dev to RIA Dev

james.kovacs — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 03:41:13 GMT

@Brian P - My intention of "classic" ASP.NET is not to be derogatory, but more to emphasize working on a pre-AJAX, pre-jQuery, pre-WatiN/Selenium, pre-Silverlight, pre-* world where a lot of ASP.NET apps exist. The idea of the series isn't to create an "ALT.NET-style" ASP.NET MVC sample, although that would be fun too. The intention is to show web developers some pragmatic steps to improve their existing apps. Yes, some "ALT.NET"/agile concepts will be worked in such as build scripts and CI, improving the architecture, better separation of concerns, and such. Others (or should I say most) will focus on core web concepts, such as good XHTML/CSS, jQuery/QUnit, and the other topics that I mentioned - all of which can be applied to any project - agile or otherwise. Given my own inclinations, I'll present them with an agile mindset, but in a way that is approachable to those who don't subscribe to TDD/BDD/*DD. :)

re: MSDN Magazine Series: From Web Dev to RIA Dev

George — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:52:34 GMT

Just for some perspective - where I work, we're trying to persuade 'da management' that we need to move from Classic ASP (not even ASP.NET)...

re: MSDN Magazine Series: From Web Dev to RIA Dev

Mike DeKoning — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:03:20 GMT

@Brain P: Actually ASP.Net MVC was released on Wednesday.

re: MSDN Magazine Series: From Web Dev to RIA Dev

Brian P — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:38:34 GMT

I think its a great idea, but I don't think I like the labeling of “classic” ASP.NET. I agree with the alt.net practices like unit testing, separation of concerns, and most of that good stuff, but Microsoft has just recently announced support for jquery (even still, doesn't mean you have to use it), and ASP.NET MVC hasn't even been released yet. Isn't the classic thing a little premature? Just seems the term might be getting thrown around to try and shame people for not being up to speed with the alt.net way.

re: MSDN Magazine Series: From Web Dev to RIA Dev

Mike DeKoning — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 14:03:51 GMT

I'd love to see you update the classic IBuySpy Portal. The DotNetNuke version has never thrilled me for some reason. Considering all of the talk surrounding SilverLight 3 about building business apps, this is possibly the most business-like app from the ASP.Net starter kits.

Whatever you chose, I'm sure it will be an interesting series to follow.

re: MSDN Magazine Series: From Web Dev to RIA Dev

Alexis Kennedy — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:51:40 GMT

Concrete ideas about how Feathers' get-it-under-test-and-then-change-it techniques can be applied to the view layer would be great.

I'd like to see how tools like QUnit could / would work in a traditional CI setup.

And I'd like to see the reconditioned app be one with a bunch of complex nested / reused content - master pages, .ascx and so forth in a reasonably complex hierarchy - I feel this is a natural pain point.

I'm very much looking forward to this. Is it going to turn up in your CodeBetter feed as well?

re: MSDN Magazine Series: From Web Dev to RIA Dev

Bernhard Hofmann — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:35:35 GMT

Whatever you choose, please choose something that is simple enough that allows us to see the metamorphosis clearly, without being bogged down in the idiosyncrasies of the application.

I'll be watching closely because, even without the current economic climate, brownfield is an area where companies can reap greater reward if done well.

re: Confusion about PowerShell Script Signing

Joel "Jaykul" Bennett — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:36:12 GMT

You can pass the CONTENTS of a script as a -Command parameter to PowerShell. The purpose of signed scripts is about which scripts you trust. If a malicious user can execute a process on your computer, they own you already -- this isn't meant to prevent that.

blogs.msdn.com/.../powershell-s-security-guiding-principles.aspx

The scenario script signing protects against is where you're using a network share, or you've shared out a folder ... and someone copies a script there -- maybe even overwriting one of your scripts (like your Profile.ps1), or putting something like "notepad.ps1" in your path environment.

Script signing keeps YOU from accidentally running someone else's script that you didn't intentionally trust. It doesn't keep someone else from running a script on your PC.