wtatters wrote
Ummm that was kinda the point - DNN4 is still built in largely around VS2003 last I checked - and you could count on one hand the commercial modules that provide source code that is prebuilt and ready to EDIT in VS2005.
DNN has allot of areas which are built around VS2003, but works without a problem in VS2005... and more and more functionalities which are .NET 2.0 specific are being built in every day since the inception of DNN4. The fact that it was built with VS2003 doesn't mean it has problems being edited in VS2005. As for commercial modules, there I am not sure... mostly we develop our own solutions and lately they are ALL on DNN4 only so I can't really say.
As for the source not being there for DNN4... I can understand that, I expect source to appear like that only now or in the near future, simply because developers had to support DNN3 enviroment, and it's easier to leave a DNN3 module on .NET 1.1 and just build it to have .NET 2.0 support then add .NET 2.0 features and then scale down just to support DNN3. But, as DNN3 is dropped from development I think now also module developers will be able to stop supporting old versions and go .NET 2.0 all the way (some of them already have).
wtatters wrote
As more people move to VISTA like platforms and discover that VS2003 and vista dont mix - then we are much more likely to finally see a full move to VS2005 ... or maybe VS2007 / ORCA.
What do you consider a full move? If everything works fine in VS2005, and if you have options to develop modules... what more do you want? The whole core project to be rewritten?
Plus, DNN3 was dropped from development, what more could be a full move?
wtatters wrote
But till then - developing in VS2005 can be a bit of a challenge for new users - especailly given the problems and confusing so many of them seem to have about how to even get started given the various and not nescessarily compatible development methodologies currently being offer from WAP to DYNAMIC to your own DNN stub soliuton.
My solution is THE WAP solution
It is not DNN stub... DNN stub is something built by Nik from Speerio for DNN3
Module development is challenging itself, it doesn't have to do ANYTHING with the current state of the core, or anything similar. Especially if the user is a beginner. Nothing will change that... not Whidbey, not Orcas.
Also, together with Michael's tutorials, my own WAP approach, Module Developers Guide I only think users have a better choice to chose what they see fit...
wtatters wrote
But the varying methodologies only seem to get people more confused than ever.
Why? The documentation is clear on the options, plus the community ones are an added bonus as a better solution in most cases. In my opinion this current problem doesn't have to do anything with the confussion in the development arena of DNN4.
If the user is not clear with himself what approach to use, or how each of them works he should read the documentation or post questions to the forums (which this was).
Ok have to get back to work...