[IronPython] IronPython for ASP.Net

Sun May 24 14:43:23 CEST 2009

Judging by the last internal email I saw about this on Friday, I'd guess
not... :(

On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Dody Gunawinata <empirebuilder at gmail.com>wrote:

> Is there any chance for this to come up today? I know it's weekend and the
> summer.
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:21 PM, Jimmy Schementi <
> Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>> Woops, I meant 2.6.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com [mailto:
>> users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] *On Behalf Of *Dody Gunawinata
>> *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2009 11:39 AM
>> *To:* Discussion of IronPython
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [IronPython] IronPython for ASP.Net
>>
>>
>>
>> IronPython 2 Beta 1 ?
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:11 AM, Jimmy Schementi <
>> Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> I completely agree with your points; we have a finite amount of resources
>> and choose to focus on language compatibility over .NET web-stack
>> integration. Though IronPython has done that web-work in the past, we’re
>> purely focused on compat. I’ve forwarded on the previous mail to the
>> ASP.NET team; I want to see IronPython and IronRuby be used on the web
>> more too. =)
>>
>>
>>
>> That being said, *I’ve just finished packaging up
>> Microsoft.Web.Scripting.dll that works against the released IronPython 2
>> Beta 1, and I’ll be releasing it either today to tomorrow* … so end of
>> conversation? =P Na, I this is a good conversation to have, but in short
>> you’ll be able to use IronPython 2 Beta 1 in ASP.NET very soon again.
>> Hopefully the next beta of IronPython 2.6 will include the DLL and source,
>> otherwise I’ll make this package again.
>>
>>
>>
>> ~js
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Dody Gunawinata [mailto:empirebuilder at gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:23 AM
>> *To:* Jimmy Schementi
>> *Cc:* Discussion of IronPython
>> *Subject:* Re: [IronPython] IronPython for ASP.Net
>>
>>
>>
>> The refresh was unusable because it contained the version of IronPyton
>> that is not compatible with .Net 3.5 framework (I think it was built on IP
>> 2.0 Beta 3/4);
>>
>> I'm griping about this issue in this list because I don't think this is a
>> completely separate issue from the DLR programming languages. Maybe it is
>> not a direct responsibility of this team, but the impact is direct for the
>> following reasons:
>>
>>    - Nobody adopts a language as is. The libraries matters. The existing
>>    community of Python and Ruby are not going to move to Windows platform just
>>    because IronPython and IronRuby are being worked on and released. They have
>>    had a multi platform runtimes with de facto standards that are capable of
>>    doing wonderful things for more than a decade.
>>    - There is much bigger market for language adoption for existing
>>    .Net/Windows based developers (and new developers) and these guys/gals are
>>    using mostly standard Microsoft stacks. And they are using .Net via mainly
>>    C# and VB.Net. If the DLR languages do not have proper support at least for
>>    the major technology stacks (I would consider ASP.Net/Silverlight as major
>>    stacks), many people will not consider using the DLR based language for
>>    their production systems.
>>    - I know ASP.Net MVC is open source and it's free to be extended etc,
>>    but ASP.Net WebForm have be en deployed massively and that's not going to
>>    change anytime soon. And theres is already a support, albeit poor and not up
>>    to date, for ASP.Net webform stacks in IronPython. Not having it fully
>>    updated is a waste of opportunity.
>>    - .Net 4.0 and C# vNext contains dynamic language support but really,
>>    what is good for if the DLR languages can only be used in much more limited
>>    scenarios because some major technology stacks are not supported.
>>    - You raised correctly that Django and  RoR are being used to validate
>>    the  languages. But I would argue that the existing technology stack support
>>    validates the DLR platform, not just the languages.
>>
>> So yes, I'm not happy with the level of investment being put on supporting
>> the technology stacks because I think it is pretty short sighted. No, I
>> don't blame this team for this but at least if I complain on this list, it
>> might have a chance being forwarded internally because this is one of the
>> best community mailing list for Microsoft technologies.
>>
>> Dody Gunawinata
>>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:17 AM, Jimmy Schementi <
>> Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> First off, it hasn’t been three years: a refresh was released 8 months
>> ago, and sent to this very list:
>>
>>
>> http://lists.ironpython.com/pipermail/users-ironpython.com/2008-September/008497.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Secondly, rather than just producing these one off releases (where are
>> very taxing on the team), we’re doing it right and getting the source code
>> released and Ms-Pl’d, so we can include it on Codeplex sources, builds, and
>> nightly builds. Then it can be included in each IronPython release, just
>> like Silverlight binaries are.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lastly, IronRuby and IronPython are programming languages, made by
>> programming language teams. We’re very interested in running as many
>> existing Ruby and Python programs as possible. It just so happens that
>> Django and Rails are popular, complex pieces of software that help find
>> bugs, and give the languages street cred for running them. If those web
>> frameworks didn’t run, theirs probably something wrong with our language.
>>
>>
>>
>> Running in ASP.NET and MVC require a significant amount of work *outside*of the language, so it really isn’t a language team’s purpose to build that.
>> Sure they provide good demos as conferences or blog posts, but they’ll only
>> be toys. We’ve invested in those technologies before, which is why the
>> ASP.NET and Silverlight integration exists, but no one is working on
>> enabling web-technologies full-time (though I have spurts of diving back
>> into Silverlight from time to time). If you don’t like the level of
>> investment in dynamic languages for Microsoft web technologies, that’s
>> something that you should communicate to the ASP.NET team; Phil Haack (
>> http://www.haacked.com) or Dmitry Robsman (http://blogs.msdn.com/dmitryr)
>> are good people to address.
>>
>>
>>
>> ~Jimmy
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com [mailto:
>> users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] *On Behalf Of *Dody Gunawinata
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 20, 2009 1:22 PM
>> *To:* Discussion of IronPython
>> *Subject:* [IronPython] IronPython for ASP.Net
>>
>>
>>
>> Is there any update for IronPython for ASP.Net?
>>
>>
>>
>> It has been three years since IronPython support for ASP.Net introduced
>> with the release of the whitepaper (
>> http://www.asp.net/DynamicLanguages/whitepaper/) and the first binary.
>> Since then I think we've had Katrina, a Beijing Olympic, a new President, a
>> financial collapse and two James Bond movies - yet until now there is still
>> no up to date support for the technology. I know that the legal team, etc
>> are working on the source release, but I think it is pretty galling that
>> Microsoft's own web framework stack is barely supported by its own dynamic
>> language technology, both on the 'classic' ASP.Net and MVC stack. I mean
>> there is more energy put into having IronPython and IronRuby to run Django
>> and RubyOnRails web framework instead of ASP.Net stack. This just doesn't
>> make sense to me.
>>
>> --
>> nomadlife.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> nomadlife.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.ironpython.com
>> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> nomadlife.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> nomadlife.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ironpython-users/attachments/20090524/c860bd20/attachment.html>