Hi All,

I just wonder why the DNN team decided to use website model when they start the  new dnn version 4 ?

I beleive the DNN website must be WAP ,because generally the website model used in the small websites and its really not good when you try to put it in the source control systam like Source safe .

Also , I recently noticed that the dnn install versions contains the code , and when i created a PreComplied version from the website ,the errors started to appear .

One of the errors happened after i tried to install the Dnn using the precomplied version .  in isntallation wizard and after entering the host passwrord , the intaller creates the App_Code folder and add some authentication providers classes to that folder ,which then throws a new error telling that you can't have App_Code when the website is PreComplied .

There is quite a history around this.

During the Spring and Summer of 2005 when we started to move to .NET 2.0 - there only was the socalled Website Project (WSP) so as we had decided to try and have a 4.0 version released to coincide with the release of ASP.NET 2.0 in Nvember 2005, that was our only choice.

Because of our complaints to MS (as well as the complaints of others), Web Application Projects were released during Spring 2006 as an "Add-on".

By this time we had made considerable investment in the WSP approach and it was decided to stick with it.

According to MS - there is no significant performance/scalable differences between the two.

We do not support precompilation for two major reasons:

1. We use the App_GlobalResources and App_LocalResources folders for our xml based language files.
2. As you discovered we support the use of App_Code for WSP based modules.

Both of these are incompatible with precompiled websites.

Thanks Charles , I think if the WAP was availabe at that time and if it was supported by VWD express editions , then i think it would be esier to migrate vs 2003 websites to WAP , and i think you may chose it instead of WSP.

Michael Washington : The website project is not playing good with visul source safe , because source safe was designed to work with project files , and believe me , the WAP is much better for source controls .

Also website project doesn't support files/folders execlude , and every time i want to execlude folders from source safe ( like core desktopmodules folders ) , i have to make those folders hidden using windows explorer so that they will not included in the website project.