4 ms·

Microsoft fucked themselves hard having basically no upgrade path from legacy ASP.Net Framework to what there is now. It basically dead ended the large million

Microsoft fucked themselves hard having basically no upgrade path from legacy ASP.Net Framework to what there is now. It basically dead ended the large million line app that ran the company I worked for and forced a costly rewrite away from Microsoft. Though many parts of it still exist today, still on 4.8. For a company, Microsoft, that prizes backward compatibility and typically provides good upgrade paths, I felt very betrayed having trusted them as our platform.

neonsunset 3y ago
The upgrade path to ASP.NET Core itself is the most straightforward out of everything that existed during .NET Framework days, a lot of code requires little to no changes and the code that requires a lot usually was questionably written in the first place or relies on problematic APIs.
- bottlepalm 3y ago
  What are you talking about? ASP .Net Framework versus Core is completely different. Not just rewritten the API is totally changed as well. Many libraries were completely removed - WebForms, OData 3, the entire bundling infrastructure, etc.. How requests are handled, and how you pre/post process requests is completely changed as well. Their documentation even says, "Updating an app from ASP.NET Framework to ASP.NET Core is non-trivial for the majority of production apps" Even that is an understatement. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/migration/inc/overview https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/migration/inc/...
  - neonsunset 3y ago
    It was not trivial but the subjective experience matters a lot. In migrations that I participated in the most difficult parts were not related to ASP.NET but to third-party libraries. Another pain point at the time was moving off WCF which ended up being packaged up on some legacy Windows host as a separate microservice for just that purpose to not hold everything else back but that's it. Swapping out the startup and hosting models was not a challenge because the APIs were comparable, some controller classes had no lines changed either, and moving off IIS pool arguably is all around improvement (and far easier, to manage with docker and deployment manifests).

neonsunset 3y ago

The upgrade path to ASP.NET Core itself is the most straightforward out of everything that existed during .NET Framework days, a lot of code requires little to no changes and the code that requires a lot usually was questionably written in the first place or relies on problematic APIs.

bottlepalm 3y ago
What are you talking about? ASP .Net Framework versus Core is completely different. Not just rewritten the API is totally changed as well. Many libraries were completely removed - WebForms, OData 3, the entire bundling infrastructure, etc.. How requests are handled, and how you pre/post process requests is completely changed as well. Their documentation even says, "Updating an app from ASP.NET Framework to ASP.NET Core is non-trivial for the majority of production apps" Even that is an understatement. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/migration/inc/overview https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/migration/inc/...
- neonsunset 3y ago
  It was not trivial but the subjective experience matters a lot. In migrations that I participated in the most difficult parts were not related to ASP.NET but to third-party libraries. Another pain point at the time was moving off WCF which ended up being packaged up on some legacy Windows host as a separate microservice for just that purpose to not hold everything else back but that's it. Swapping out the startup and hosting models was not a challenge because the APIs were comparable, some controller classes had no lines changed either, and moving off IIS pool arguably is all around improvement (and far easier, to manage with docker and deployment manifests).