Alex Nedelcu wrote: > ASP.NET is quite a controversial piece of the .NET framework. > ADO.NET is another controversial library, that has no replacement. > > As Thomas Jefferson said ... the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. > Why can't we just stick with the ECMA standards and create true > open-source alternatives for the rest of the .NET framework ? > Is it really that hard ?
Yes. Simply planning and getting a consensus on a framework is very difficult. Look at PHP. It had no good cohesive framework for a very long time and now there are dozens of competing ones all at various stages of completion. Choice is good, but only when there are good options to choose from. > I mean, besides licensing reasons, really ... ASP.NET is very > tool-oriented to be bearable without VS.NET, > and ADO.NET simply sucks, as I've never seen a more poorly designed > database access library. I agree, but remember that Mono will (and has already) attract many traditionally Microsoft developers. It couldn't do that without a compatible framework. Also - MonoDevelop is coming along nicely: http://mjhutchinson.com/journal/2006-27-07/aspnetedit_in_monodevelop_teaser > I thought about starting my own database access library, similar to > Python's or Perl's DBI. > Shouldn't be too hard to create such interfaces and then to create a > mysql adapter by wrapping the mysql C library, > the only problem being the limited free time I have. I think that everyone here probably has the same problem. -- Michael Schurter Synthesys Computer Solutions http://www.synthesyssolutions.com/ _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
