6 ms·

Awesome. As a Linux guy (and running a couple FreeBSD servers) in a Windows world and Windows shop, I'm glad to see these ports. I'd love to take our code and

Awesome. As a Linux guy (and running a couple FreeBSD servers) in a Windows world and Windows shop, I'm glad to see these ports. I'd love to take our code and port it to different platforms, alas .. 'WinForms', 'WPF', 'WCF'. Ignoring the UI part - there are no solutions as far as I'm aware (nope, Gtk# isn't one either) - what do people use as a WCF replacement? So you're developing a .Net app and need SOAP for one reason or another: What do you pick?

txdv 12y ago
Why is Gtk# not a solution?
- regularfry 12y ago
  At a guess, I'd say that would be a rewrite, not a port.
  - darklajid 12y ago
    There's that, right :) That said, I apologize for the 'no solution' part. It was uncalled for. I personally don't like working with Gtk# (said as someone that still seems to be listed in the Tomboy maintainers file, although I haven't contributed for a long time). It might be a viable solution. I plainly don't like it very much.
    - tracker1 12y ago
      Winforms support in Mono might work, but many 3rd party controls simply don't work right outside windows... but that depends on your original project... WPF is almost a non-starter in mono. I mostly work with services and web based apps, so it's more likely to work in mono. That said, I'm doing most new development in node/iojs these days, and prefer it that way.
josteink 12y ago
> So you're developing a .Net app and need SOAP for one reason or another: What do you pick? I haven't used it myself, but I've seen it mentioned several times, so I'll just throw it out there for visibility: https://servicestack.net/ https://servicestack.net/
- darklajid 12y ago
  Looked into that in the past, but that's a commercial project, right? While the setting I'm looking at is commercial as well (a corporate product), the idea is a rogue "let's see if I can port that in my free time, because why not" project. No budget. No corporate interest. And frankly, porting WCF services to SS would be a tough sell, if the former work fine and are 'free'/included, so I guess there's zero chance to upstream this, unfortunately.
  - ghuntley 12y ago
    ServiceStack v4 is commerical and really, really cheap. ServiceStack v3 is licensed under MIT (or BSD) and extremely mature, the community has taken over support and it has allowed Dennis to focus implementing features that $enterprise really care/need that the usual developer does not.
    - tiedmann 12y ago
      FYI v4 source is AGPL. They're not very good at mentioning it on the main site though. (https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack)
      - darklajid 12y ago
        Thanks, I didn't even see that. The site lists 'free' only for a limited featureset (like 10 requests it seems?). That'll let me check it out at least.
        ghuntley 12y ago
tbrownaw 12y ago
WinForms seems to work OK under Mono on Linux, which also IIRC claims WCF support.

txdv 12y ago

Why is Gtk# not a solution?

regularfry 12y ago
At a guess, I'd say that would be a rewrite, not a port.
- darklajid 12y ago
  There's that, right :) That said, I apologize for the 'no solution' part. It was uncalled for. I personally don't like working with Gtk# (said as someone that still seems to be listed in the Tomboy maintainers file, although I haven't contributed for a long time). It might be a viable solution. I plainly don't like it very much.
  - tracker1 12y ago
    Winforms support in Mono might work, but many 3rd party controls simply don't work right outside windows... but that depends on your original project... WPF is almost a non-starter in mono. I mostly work with services and web based apps, so it's more likely to work in mono. That said, I'm doing most new development in node/iojs these days, and prefer it that way.

josteink 12y ago

> So you're developing a .Net app and need SOAP for one reason or another: What do you pick? I haven't used it myself, but I've seen it mentioned several times, so I'll just throw it out there for visibility: https://servicestack.net/ https://servicestack.net/

darklajid 12y ago
Looked into that in the past, but that's a commercial project, right? While the setting I'm looking at is commercial as well (a corporate product), the idea is a rogue "let's see if I can port that in my free time, because why not" project. No budget. No corporate interest. And frankly, porting WCF services to SS would be a tough sell, if the former work fine and are 'free'/included, so I guess there's zero chance to upstream this, unfortunately.
- ghuntley 12y ago
  ServiceStack v4 is commerical and really, really cheap. ServiceStack v3 is licensed under MIT (or BSD) and extremely mature, the community has taken over support and it has allowed Dennis to focus implementing features that $enterprise really care/need that the usual developer does not.
  - tiedmann 12y ago
    FYI v4 source is AGPL. They're not very good at mentioning it on the main site though. (https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack https://github.com/ServiceStack/ServiceStack)
    - darklajid 12y ago
      Thanks, I didn't even see that. The site lists 'free' only for a limited featureset (like 10 requests it seems?). That'll let me check it out at least.
      - ghuntley 12y ago

tbrownaw 12y ago

WinForms seems to work OK under Mono on Linux, which also IIRC claims WCF support.