--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ".NET HTTP Abstractions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to net-http-abstrac...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to net-http-abstractions+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ".NET HTTP Abstractions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to net-http-abstrac...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Count me in on the its-all-going-to-be-mw train. There will always be a place for the larger does-it-all frameworks. But the direction I am personally going in is modularity and composibility at a finer granularity.
We've had conversations to find some common ground between routing, especially as it's the first component I'll probably release in the OR3 family, as it's the most complete.
That said, I'd rather keep it a discussion between implementers of it, form a draft we pre-agree on and then submit it to owin shall we decide it's worth standardising, dragons ahead if we start anything by trying to design by committee.
Count me in on the its-all-going-to-be-mw train. There will always be a place for the larger does-it-all frameworks. But the direction I am personally going in is modularity and composibility at a finer granularity.
The real question is, how much of "routing" is coupled to the "framework", decoupling the two is a very important piece, but the same could be said of request to object mapping and object to response mapping. We need to be careful about not wanting to standardize
everything and leave nothing to framework / library authors to innovate on.
The real question is, how much of "routing" is coupled to the "framework", decoupling the two is a very important piece, but the same could be said of request to object mapping and object to response mapping. We need to be careful about not wanting to standardize everything and leave nothing to framework / library authors to innovate on.
From: net-http-a...@googlegroups.com <net-http-a...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Mark Rendle <ma...@markrendle.net>
Sent: 29 June 2014 12:05
To: net-http-a...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Routing
Thanks Pete, I think we're seeing the same possibilities here around modularity. I can't see my original post and I can't remember if I said this, but having the route as a first-class environment value also helps with things like logging, analytics, and so on. I think Glimpse shows the matched route forASP.NET MVC, it would be good if it could do that using a standard in OWIN.