On Jul 20, 4:42 pm, John Simons <[email protected]> wrote: > This is also interesting: > "At the end Windsor feels old and ugly (like it is with Monorail compared to > MVC)." >
Hey Guys -- I'm mostly a lurker here, so I hope you won't mind me 'uncloaking' and tossing in my two cents, as I am wont to do from time to time. I have used the Castle stack on a handful of non-trivial projects over the past few years (specifically MonoRail with Windsor), so I have some opinions. I hope you realize that the feedback John has cited above is almost certainly utter nonsense. In other words, the Microsoft Reality- Distortion Field is so powerful that a great number of developers are completely unable to use the rational senses when dealing with .NET technologies. If it's from MSFT, it's wonderful; everything else "feels old and ugly" (what in the world does that even *mean*?!!?). This sort of nonsense is pervasive, and frankly it's why I've made a concerted effort to get away from the .NET stack as much as possible (I've spent the last year with python, django, postgres, debian, etc.). You all have done a wonderful job with the Castle project, and I feel sympathy for you, because in most any other technology stack you would feel like true winners instead of MSFT MVC chasers (when in reality ASP.NET MVC wouldn't exist if not for MR being alive and awesome first). Only God knows how much more .NET development I'll be doing in my career as a software developer / consultant -- it depends on what clients come my way. But you can bet that Castle will continue to be my first-choice .NET technology if/when my clients demand .NET. Therefore, I'll be watching how this conversation regarding MR3 plays out. I know there has been a lot of talk about making MR3 'compatible with' ASP.NET MVC. I think that could be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what 'compatible with' precisely means, but I'm wary in general. On the one hand I can understand not wanting to duplicate functionality that exists elsewhere, but on the other hand having all your code open-source (and I mean real modern fork-and-hack open- source as opposed to 90's-era send-me-a-patch-and-maybe-we'll- incorporate-it-next-year open-source) with minimal dependencies has its own set of obvious benefits. So anyway, to boil this whole thing down, please beware the MSFT Reality Distortion Field, and please consider what you might be giving up in terms of flexibility/adaptability if you take on some 'untouchable' dependencies. Thanks guys, --Stuart -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
