mod_aspdotnet orphaned?

[Mark Hubbard <hu...@i-cyt.com>]

Hello all,

I've been using mod_aspdotnet for a few months now, in a serious
project.  On the whole it works well.  We use the IHttpHandler interface
exclusively, for full control, portability, and lots of speed.  There
are no "pages" or "scripts" in our application.

So I was just browsing the developer list archive to see if the module
was about to be upgraded for .NET 2.0.  But, lo, it looks like it might
be abandoned soon!  I'm saddened to see that.  This module positions
Apache as a (quite good) head-to-head competitor to IIS for the current
and next generations of web development worldwide.  This module is the
one and only reason Apache is used in our project, and the reason I
intend to pursue some donation $$$ for the ASF.  If the support for it
disappears, I don't see much of an alternative for continued use with
Apache.  (Of course I'm open to suggestions on that.)

I might offer to contribute to the effort, but I've never had to compile
the module.  I'm not even sure that I can.  I did look over the source
code a while back to find out some of the details for our purposes.  But
as a .NET developer I'm unfamiliar with the Apache API(s) and coding
practices.

--
Mark Hubbard: mark.hubbard@i-cyt.com
Software Product Manager
iCyt Visionary Bioscience

Re: mod_aspdotnet orphaned?

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

Mark Hubbard wrote:
> 
> I've been using mod_aspdotnet for a few months now, in a serious
> project.  On the whole it works well.  We use the IHttpHandler interface
> exclusively, for full control, portability, and lots of speed.

That's good to hear!  Actually there was a thread not long back on reasons
'why use mod_aspdotnet vs ___' and more feedback to that thread is appreciated.

> and next generations of web development worldwide.  This module is the
> one and only reason Apache is used in our project, and the reason I
> intend to pursue some donation $$$ for the ASF.  If the support for it
> disappears, I don't see much of an alternative for continued use with
> Apache.  (Of course I'm open to suggestions on that.)

The ASF is an interesting place.  $$$ help is appreciated of course, to offset
the considerable costs of hardware, bandwidth and comparatively smaller
administrative costs.  But that help plays no role in project management
decisions, quite unlike commercial efforts.  Project decisions are made for
issues about the community and it's code.

The project being abandoned at the moment is cli-dev, the framework for doing
more with .NET directly inside of Apache httpd server.  It's seen no activity
and few have expressed interest.  The phrase 'Show Me The Code!' comes to mind,
there are no contributors with sufficient time or interest to make it happen,
at the present time.

The cli-dev project 'finished' with the mod_aspdotnet module for the moment.
It just works.  So the coming question is, are there enough contributors to the
ASP.NET development side (???), Apache HTTP Server development side (yes), and
the conjunction of these two to merit Apache HTTP Server adopting and therefore
maintaining the code?

mod_aspdotnet will be 'promoted' to a direct child of httpd, or be abandoned,
based on the next release vote.  If there are enough people testing and then
contributing to this code, it will remain.  Otherwise it will be archived.

> I might offer to contribute to the effort, but I've never had to compile
> the module.  I'm not even sure that I can.  I did look over the source
> code a while back to find out some of the details for our purposes.  But
> as a .NET developer I'm unfamiliar with the Apache API(s) and coding
> practices.

The dev@httpd crew, where a direct-child module will be discussed and evolve,
has lots of the later, and very little of the former.  All sorts of help, from
coding to platform development to documentation to user support is all needed
in the dev@httpd community.

The vote to release the next mod_aspdotnet will occur on the heels of the next
Apache 2.0 and 2.2 release votes.  It will be voted on at dev@httpd, but I will
send an announce here as the vote starts, and another announce at the conclusion
to indicate the survived-release or archived status of the module, and let this
list go dormant for a while until anyone picks up the energy to begin tying .NET
directly to the Apache HTTP Server core.

Which brings up a good point, if you have patches, or want a bug revisited, now
is the time to bring them up.  Although you can do so here, future discussion
after this release/archive call will occur on dev@httpd.

Bill