Deploying Source Code to Production Servers. Good or Bad?

[john]

I think some of the changes to Asp.net are rediculous. Take the
ability to deploy source code to production that is compiled on the
fly.

If this is such a great model, why not distribute your source code with
your Windows Forms apps too?

John Powell

[Scott Allen]

On 2 Dec 2005 07:02:37 -0800, "jo**@johnwpowell.com"
<jo**@johnwpowell.com> wrote:

I think some of the changes to Asp.net are rediculous. Take the
ability to deploy source code to production that is compiled on the
fly.

The ability to deploy source code to production is there - it doesn't
mean you have to deploy this way.

--
Scott
http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/

[john]

I agree with Scott and I wouldn't use that feature. The point I was
trying to make is that asp.net is now inconsistent with other types of
projects, and IMHO it shouldn't be.

The ability to deploy source code shouldn't even be an option for
security and intellectual property protection reasons.

Could it be that the designer of this approach prefered the old asp
days where everything was scripted and production websites could be
updated on the fly?

John Powell

[tdavisjr]

I think John hit the issue right on the head. It not acceptable to
update production websites on the fly. We need to start treating our
Web Applications like "real" software or real binary components, where
after we make our change we have to compile and then Test.

So, deploying source code may be convienent, but its not how software
development work. However, you may be able to get away with this for
small websites or sample code.

E.g. From our standpoint, would it be good for microsoft to deploy
their OS and their appliations with source code? Yes, that way we can
tinker with it and maybe even customize it; but deploying source code
would be a terrible thing for MS to do at it would open some doors that
would be much harder to close.

[Scott Allen]

On 2 Dec 2005 09:42:39 -0800, "jo**@johnwpowell.com"
<jo**@johnwpowell.com> wrote:

I agree with Scott and I wouldn't use that feature. The point I was
trying to make is that asp.net is now inconsistent with other types of
projects, and IMHO it shouldn't be.

Good point.

The web has long been host to a variety of interpreted, scripted
solutions. Some environments still demand this dynamic flexibility,
and it's hard for Microsoft not to offer this segment of the market a
tool. We get the best of both worlds, really, and it doesn't mean we
have to throw configuration management out the window, either.

On a related note, when Vista and WPF hit desktops, then Windows forms
and web forms will be scarily consistent from a 1,000 foot view...

--
Scott
http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/