Pardon if it's a dumb question, but I'm trying to build a personal website and, in order to kill two birds with one stone, use the website to fulfill the requirements for a web development class at my university. I want to build my website using Node JS with MongoDB and Bootstrap, but my course requirements at a later project require that I migrate my project (other students are expected to only have designed their website using pure HTML and CSS) into a .NET framework and use Microsoft SQL Server as a database.
I'd like to know whether or not I can wrap or use Node JS inside .NET or if it is feasible for me to fork my personal website to another version utilizing Microsoft technology.
Thanks.
No, you could not "wrap" or use in a practical way Node.JS inside of an ASP.NET web site. While you could theoretically start new processes from ASP.NET that run Node.JS code, it would be an unnecessarily complex setup (as you'd need to manage the processes, threads, etc.).
You can certainly use MongoDB and Bootstrap within an ASP.NET application, so some of your work could be shared.
If you will have the ability to configure IIS on your Windows server, you could use nodeiis to host a Node.js alongside a .NET site:
https://github.com/tjanczuk/iisnode
This approach works well. If you take this approach, be sure that any Node modules you include will work on Windows.
Related
Is there a way to cross-compile or port an ASP.NET based webpage to a native Windows GUI?
I am developing a web app, with an ASP.NET webservice doing much of the grunt work, and an ASP.NET webpage as the GUI. I would like to also offer an "offline" version of the app that doesn't require teaching random people how to manage IIS. Some of my target users will not have internet access consistently when they want to use the app; also, I like not having to rely on an active web connection myself because I'm an old fogey and this web 2.0 stuff is just a fad, right?
The core of the app logic is a library that is disassociated from everything else - the service just provides an API (which I want publicly available for others to use), and that I use for my own app. I could go ahead and design a new GUI in WPF or WinForms, import my libraries and there you go, but I'm lazy enough that I'm curious if there's an automated solution. Or even a semi-automated solution.
If I can target not-Windows as well, that would be nice. I already have a console interface that I used in development of the core library that directly accesses them, which I'm still testing but should relatively easy to make work in WINE but if I can offer more support for offline use to non-Windows users I'd feel better.
You could run that web application on .NET Core in a self-hosted way. That way you get the full IIS feature set and there is no need for the user to configure anything.
You can then use a WebBrowser control to show the application as a GUI app, or just open the web site in the users installed browser.
.NET Core runs on non-Windows as well.
OrchardCMS, Umbraco and DotNetNuke are CMSes in .Net galaxy. They work as stand alone applications well. Suppose I have a requirement that need CMS features in an another ASP.NET MVC application. I do not like to implement CMS again in the application. Rather I like to use current CMSes as a component of application.
Is it possible at all to use for example OrhcardCMS as a component of my MVC application? It is ideal to have relations between CMS and application itself, for example I can load entities from CMS, update them etc.
I know there are integration techniques in .Net. For example ASP.NET Identity integrates with ASP.NET applications in core level, but view (CSHTMLs) must be copied and customized in most cases. Or Hangfire and ELMAH that integrates with an application without need to copy view (cshtml, html, css) to the target application. Indeed it is good to know that integration methods are available regarding plugging CMSes into ASP.NET applications.
I can tell you more about Umbraco as I don't know other CMS as much as this one. There is a whole course / training for those who want to integrate their apps with Umbraco: https://umbraco.com/products-and-support/training/umbraco-application-integration/. So yes, it's possible and it's even suggested way from my perspective to use already done piece of software rather than building the wheel once again.
Umbraco is an ASP.NET MVC application. You can use Umbraco components, backoffice, membership and everything else CMSish delivered out of box and still you're able to write and use your business logic, controllers and everything else what you've created inside your ASP.NET MVC / C# app. Still, it's an ASP.NET app, so you can use anything what you want from the .NET world. We're using ELMAH.io for example to take care of logging and keeping the errors in the cloud. We're also using a ton of 3rd party, both open-source and commercial tools and softwares to do multiple things around our web components. Umbraco is not blocking us from using them or anything else. I like to consider Umbraco as a framework or library helping us to deal with content editing and giving us a massive number of opportunities to offer for our clients or editors.
Speaking for OrchardCMS, there are some questions touching this subject already, see
Reusing Orchard's Core to build another extensibility framework
Extracting a Module from Orchard
If it's possible for you then try to setup Orchard as the base system and move your MVC application in a module. This will be much easier than trying to cut out peaces of Orchard. In return you get amazing possibilites when running Orchard as the underlying framework, e.g. Localization, Modules, Themes, the whole user / role management etc.
OrchardCMS 2 is currently developed towards single components that can be reused in any application but it's far from finished yet.
I am supporting an ASP.NET app, which is installed on a web server and a VB6 app installed on a different app server. There is code duplication in the VB6 app and the ASP.NET app. I want to use some of the code in the ASP.NET app in VB6. I believe I have three options:
Expose the required functionality in an ASP.NET web service. The VB6 app will consume the web service.
Rewrite a small section of the vb6 app in .NET and extend the asp.net app. This will eliminate some of the code duplication.
Setup a class library for the ASP.NET app. Install the vb6 app on the web server. Expose the required functionality from the class library in a type library.
Which option is best? I believe option 2 is best.
Option 1. That leaves your shared, already-tested code on the most modern platform.
This is very hard to answer, as it varies for each company and each situation.
As a general rule, I'm very much in favor of using web services where possible, especially if multiple applications are using the same logic for the following reasons:
If I have to change the logic, I can do it in one place and fix all apps that depend on it
The same can be said for database connection strings, etc.
A bug fix can also often be fixed in one place.
I've had difficulties with a particular database that I need to deal with, where the vendor's updates tend to break their .NET adapter. Twice I had to modify/recompile a ton of apps to resolve this. Since then, we made it a policy to connect to that DB only via web services, so I'll only need to update one app in the future.
When developing mobile apps, the simple fact that we already had all our code in web services makes it that much easier to write apps that are strictly UI and leaving the business/database access logic as-is in existing web services.
All of those are pretty much "Standard" arguments for the SOA approach.
All things considered, my first recommendation, not knowing your specifics would be option #1.
There is a fourth option - a total rewrite of the VB6 app, if it's feasible, and if you can convince those who control the budgets and time allotment. Even with that, you can use the Service Oriented Architecture and split much of the logic into web services.
Are both completely different concepts? Or is there an overlap in their meaning?
Would it be correct to say that a Web Framework is used for the creation of a front-end, while a CMS is used for the back-end?
If yes, then should the Web Framework use the same technology as the CMS? For example could Ruby on Rails be used in combination with Drupal? Or doesn't that make any sense at all?
Are both completely different concepts? Or is their an overlap in their meaning?
A web (application) framework is a lower level, generic toolkit for the development of web applications. That could be any type of system managing and processing data while exposing it's data and services to human users(via web browsers and other interactive clients) as well as machines via the http protocol.
A CMS is one type of such applications: a system to manage content shown in websites. Usually/historically, this mainly means managing (pieces of) text of "pages" shown in a web site, and useres that have different levels of access to manage this content. That's where the C and the M come from.
With a CMS, you can manage web content. With a Web framework, you build web applications.
Would it be correct to say that a Web Framework is used for the creation of a front-end, while a CMS is used for the back-end?
No. It would be correct to say that a web framework can be used to create a CMS.
Both contain parts that work on the backend as well as on the front end.
Often, a CMS is based on a web framework - sometimes CMS developers build there own web framework, and sometimes they even expose the API of this framework, so a developer can create extensions to the CMS in a way as if he would develop an application with a web framework. Drupal really does this, so you can create real web applications based on the integrated framework - with the upside that they will also be easily to integrate into the CMS.
But that(exposing the API of a web framework) is no necessary criteria for being called a CMS.
If yes, then should the Web Framework use the same technology as the CMS? For example could Ruby on Rails be used in combination with Drupal? Or doesn't that make any sense at all?
It's be possible to combine two existing systems build with these two, (e.g. because you want to show some data in a web site managed by drupal, that already exists in a Rails-based system).
But as Drupal also provides you some of the genric functionality of it's underlying web framework, it might not be necessary. You would have to manage and learn two very different systems and handle all the problems with there interoperation. So, I'd try to build a Website with only one of these if possible and only combine them if theres a good reason to.
They're different concepts. A CMS can be built on top of a web-app framework, but a web-app framework has no direct relationship to a CMS. Its at a lower level, providing a platform for any type of web-app to be built on top of it, of which a CMS is an example.
Drupal runs on php and Ruby on rails runs on, well, Ruby, so they wouldn't play together.
Just to muddy the waters a bit, Drupal describes itself as a content managment framework which is essentially a content management system with hooks to extend it. Which does create an overlap. The drupal overview describes this better than I could.
Would it be correct to say that a Web Framework is used for the creation of a front-end, while a CMS is used for the back-end?
It's not "correct" but it's not wrong, either. A web framework is a general concept -- many things count. A CMS is a specific concept, often built within a web framework. Sometimes CMS's are stand-alone web applications. More often, however a CMS is a back-end things that require a customized presentation front-end.
Should the Web Framework use the same technology as the CMS?
Shouldn't matter. At the end of the API definition, the Framework and CMS can have any implementation at all.
Web App Frameworks -- generally -- must either serve HTTP requests or plug into something like Apache.
A CMS is a glorified database, and any sensible API is good. Most often, however, they're also using HTTP as their interface protocol.
Could Ruby on Rails be used in combination with Drupal?
Sure. Purists will object, but there's no technical reason why they can't cooperate.
I'm trying to start on a new project to help enrich my asp.net knowledge, since I'm not completely satisfied with what my class is teaching me. From my (very little) experience with Rails, I recall every application containing its own development web server. Say I were trying to create a local-only application, but I want it to run in a web browser (Therefore ASP.Net). Are there any options in terms of being able to distribute an application and have it launch its own, or just not require IIS/VS/Apache-mono?
You may want to look into aspNETserve. It sounds like it would fit your needs. I haven't worked on it recently, so it probably has some rough edges.
On the plus side its all open source, and if you are just getting started with ASP.NET it would be a real eye opener on how the internals of the ASP.NET lifecycle operate.
The simple answer is that you need a web server to run the application. It cannot run without one.
If we're talking demo purposes or you don't require that many features of a web server there are redistributable web-servers that you can include with your setup package.
Like Alex mentioned the most popular one seems to be Cassini.
I'm assuming that you want to run the site on the same machine you are developing it on.
Visual Studio 2005 and up allows you to run the site from VS itself if you want to view it locally on your development machine.
To my understanding Visual Web Developer allows you to do the same as well.
Visual Web Developer
You can use the cassini web server. Please note that those are different redistributable:
http://www.asp.net/Downloads/archived/cassini/
http://ultidev.com/products/Cassini/
I'm not really certain why you would want to develop a web application (with all the difficulties it entails, due to the fact that you are dealing with a stateless connection to an unknown client machine), but then run the entire thing on the client machine.
Surely it makes more sense to develop a WinForms application?
Follow this guide to setup IIS on your PC to run ASP.NET apps:
http://www.geekpedia.com/tutorial25_Setting-up-your-ASPNET-server-IIS.html