Why isn't ASP.NET MVC 2.0 part of the .NET 4.0 BCL ?
+1
A:
I would say that these two items have different project time/release cycles and putting them was something that didn't make sense to each project.
Preet Sangha
2010-04-25 23:12:20
+9
A:
ASP.NET MVC is being developed with a yearly cadence, unlike the .NET Framework which releases major new versions every few years. Tying ASP.NET MVC with the .NET Framework would put severe constraints on MVC's release schedule and functionality while not offering any tangible benefits to customers.
Think of it in much the same way that Silverlight is released with a somewhat yearly cadence. Part of Silverlight's flexibility and the speed at which new features can be added is due to the fact that it is an out-of-band release and is not tied to the .NET Framework proper.
Levi
2010-04-26 00:42:29
It makes sense. Is this the first 'System' assembly not in the BCL ? I think it shouldn't use the 'System' namespace.
Max Toro
2010-04-26 05:04:15
That it's a 'System' assembly is really something of a historical artifact, since it was originally intended to be part of .NET 3.5 SP1. It was pulled out of that release for the reasons described above. It may (but is not anticipated to) become part of the BCL at a later date. And it's not the only 'System.*' assembly outside of the BCL.
Levi
2010-04-26 07:20:31