I'm surprised at all of the stuff we're seeing in MVCContrib & what MonoRail has that isn't even mentioned here!

Any change in TempData?  It had no setter before and depended deeply on HttpContext.  Would be nice to have it just implement IDictionary (with a setter) so that we could better test it.

You've been kicked (a good thing) - Trackback from DotNetKicks.com

Somehow I'm not surprised that the ALT.NET community is disappointed in the new release.  I'm not trying to be uncivil, but will the ALT.NET community ever be satisfied with anything Microsoft does?  It continues to confuse me why a group of people who seem so unhappy with the Microsoft platform on continue to use it.  If there is something else out there that better meets your needs, why don't you use that?  Is it just that your employer requires you to use this platform?  It just seems counterproductive to me to maintain such a negative tone all the time.  Sure, encourage people to use good techniques and hone their craft, but I don't think continually bashing Microsoft for not providing everything you want accomplishes this.  Again, I don't want to make anybody mad, I would just like to understand your motivation and the reasoning behind your methods.

Brian,

I always agree it is not a good thing when people blame somebody/something for nothing.

But it *seems for me* that Jeffrey is right in many of his points. There are no radical changes.

I have just read the Release details of Preview 2 and see the things like "changed constructor parameters", or "added abstract class" etc etc.

This is not what I really expect from ASP.NET MVC.

I would expect to see changes like these: "Added Silverlight support to MVC", "Added nested SubViews support", "Added set of MVC Controls (grid, tree etc)".

I still can see that MonoRail is going to be much more mature and useful for at least a year or two.

Regards,

Dmitriy.

I still believe going the route of mapping routes to controllers is the wrong approach. Mapping routes to resource types, and mapping resource access to multiple controllers, and finally basing the rendering of resources to content-type specific views is the right way to go.

On the bright side, asp.net mvc not answering rest, conneg and resource-first design, it leaves plenty of space to do better with another framework. Maybe like one that runs on .net 2 :)

@Brian,

I am disappointed.  A release like this, 3 months after preview 1 from an "agile" team with great talent.  Yes, I am very disappointed.  My excitement that MS could build a solid extensible framework is completely gone.  

> If there is something else out there that better meets your needs, why don't you use that?

Umm, yeah, hence the alt.net group, "alternative". We use things like Windsor, Structure Map, Monorail, NHibernate, log4net, lucene, boo, and custom DSL.  We get tired of fighting the MS frameworks, NOT the platform.  I love the CLR and C# 3.5.

MVC Framework CTP 2

Jeffrey Palermo has just announced that the second release of Microsoft's ASP.NET MVC Framework is

For all those interested in the information and the latest bits from the ASP.NET Team, here are the latest

Pingback from  Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock  » The Morning Brew #48

Brian,

The ALT.NET community isn't required to be satisfied with shoddy work, just as you don't have to be satisfied with criticisms of shoddy work.  I think that the issue here ia that you haven't gained insight into the engineering practices in play outside of the Microsoft sphere of influence and you likely don't have a frame of reference that helps you see why the work is lacking in software design know-how.

To understand the motivation and reasoning behind the methods, you gotta invest the time and effort to learn the principles and practices, otherwise there'll be little shared understanding to enable any kind of meaningful dialog.

Pingback from  Know thy dependencies and control them efficiently at Rinat Abdullin

Another "STILL A PROBLEM" to me is Component Controllers cannot be set to come from a container. It still needs a parameterless constructor. I looked for somethnig like ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory() for ComponentController but i had no luck,

Any Ideas on this?

I'm upgrading my partywithpalermo.com website for the MVP Summit party , and I'm retrofitting

Solved the issue by implementing classes like ComponentControllerBuilder and adding one more extension method to HtmlHelper making the componentcontroller created y componentcontrollerbuilder.

In fairness, I think the MS team is doing a good job with the MVC framework. Sure, it's not as far along as MonoRails or RoR, but it's still in its infancy, so that's to be expected.

Doing frequent releases (even if they are 3 months apart) and operating in relative transparency is something that must not have been easy. It goes against much of the established corporate culture. I can't think of another corporation that is doing this better.

I think the changes that were made in the most recent CTP probably represent more work than most people would imagine. In my experience, getting the framework right is what takes time. Getting the naming, inheritance heirarchies, and member visibility right takes a very long time. Once it is finalized and the ASP.NET team is comfortable with it, I think we'll see things like MVC controls, Silverlight support, etc. come pretty rapidly.

It's early. I think the releases will come faster (maybe monthly) and you'll see progress.

All the typical naysayers will come out, bash this, then go back to RoR's, etc...

This is all so much better than webforms, I would take it right now over webforms as is  :)

Pingback from  Wöchentliche Rundablage: ASP.NET MVC, Silverlight 2, LINQ… | Code-Inside Blog