I was wondering if it's possible to create an mvc project with layers inside or even multiple projects using the same web address.
Like if I have a website called mysite.com which have a website project doing sine stuff.
But then I have a webproject which I'm doing some experimentational code on which I whould like to find via the url "mysite.com/test". This whold be a dufferent mvc project. Is that even possible?
It is possible, what you actually need to is create a new project and define it inside a virtual directory.
MVC is based on global.asax and web.config configurations and you can't have 2 separate projects inside the same application. In the scenario you described, it sounds like you need to create a "Virtual Directory" in IIS for the second application instead of making just a "Sub Folder".
The Virtual Directory will allow you to declare a new web.config and global.asax where you set the new routings and configurations method for your second application and this will also give you the freedom for independent updates without affecting your main project.
For a full walkthrough on how you can perform this please refer to this site:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/vstudio/bb763173(v=vs.100).aspx
Related
I'm looking at this MVC WebApi starter kit (for Angular/TypeScript)
Ignoring all the client side code, I noticed the author has made a WebApi that is extremely bare bones. Has has taken out most scaffolding including _ViewStart.cshtml, _Layout.cshtml, and forgoed the convention of controllers in Controllers folder and views in View folder under subdirectory with same name of controller, etc.
He added some interesting Routing and Validation classes that I havent seen before in a Core folder and put controllers in Api folder and Views directly into Views folder with an Index.cshtml at the root.
It's very clean and barebone project structure for a standalone web api that will do nothing except serve data to a client heavy application. I kind of like it this way but before jumping ship I'm wondering what drawbacks this approach has and if I'm actually giving up any core features of the framework by doing it this way. For example, clearly MVC Areas are being given up here in favor of flexibility to create your own view folders structure and seperation of application sections (I'm okay with getting rid of MVC Areas I rarely used them anyways). Another thing is I don't think a Controller action method can return View() and it will find it in the Views folder by convention of the controller name. I'm also okay with that since I will only be serving JSON data and will use 100% client side templating.
Are there any other core features that are being abandoned that I'm missing that may make me regret going with this project structure?
When I create Web APIs that are hosted in IIS, the only files in my web application are web.config, global.asax and global.asax.cs. Everything else is not required.
Take a look at this template if you haven't already before you decide how to structure your ASP.Net MVC / Angular project:
http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/5af151b2-9ed2-4809-bfe8-27566bfe7d83
You can always add components into your project later, so I wouldn't seat it too much. I like to start with a lean/mostly empty project first and add things myself so that I fully understand what I'm adding.
ok, i know there are a lot of posts online that specify how to do iterations with MVC.
my question is slightly different. when i used to do iterations using WebForms, i was creating one thing only and finishing that one thing till the end which was including the deployment on production.
for example, i was creating a webpage and deploying it, then i create the second page and deploy it. so .dll files were added to my bin folder while the previous dlls remain untouched. at the other hand, when i was making a change latter on, there was this one file that needed to be replaced on production.
now here is the question, how can i acheive the same thing in mvc? beause it just doesn't deploy each page into an individual dll. each time that i add something i have to redeploy the application dll which is not really wise! i played around with deployment options in visual studio but no luck!
There is nothing preventing you from putting controllers and other code in separate assemblies and dropping them in an existing application. Like any ASP.NET based application an MVC application will automatically restart if you add or modify any file in the bin folder or modify web.config.
If you're using Razor you can use RazorGenerator to generate code for your views and compile them into the same assembly.
You may need to write some additional logic though to get routes, model binders etc. wired up correctly.
For a more structures approach to compose the application of separate modules, you may want to look into portable areas. This is an extension to ASP.NET MVC that allows you to package the entire module (including views, css, js etc.) into a single assembly.
First thing, you have to work on the title of the post, it does not match the content of the post.
In asp.net mvc u can choose to deploy only what changed. I.e. If you only changed the .cshtml file, then you can just replace it with the file in production. However if you change any controller class (C#/Vb code), then you will have to upload the web project dll file too so that this new changes are available in the production env
I have an MVC 3 app that has some core functionality (most important is autorisation) but mainly serves as a portal to different areas or modules. I want to organize thit to different modules that with minor changes also can be deployed as their own website.
The project consists of a Forum, Blog engine, Messaging between users + 4-5 upcoming modules.
I looked at ScottGu's blog about MVC 2 and found something that seemed perfect:
Depending og what the customer need I want to only give them the exact modules they can use. It is also easier from a maintainence view to be able to work and update referencd assemblies in each project and just do a full update for the customers that have that spesific module on their server.
But in MVC 3 there is no apparent way to use Areas this way, do you know how?
Status
I will try to add MVCContrib Portable areas to my existing solution and convert my areas ower and will post back the results. If it works I will mark it as the accepted solution.
MVCContrib has portable areas.
http://mvccontrib.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=Creating%20a%20Portable%20Area&referringTitle=Documentation
This is possible in MVC3:
From:
http://bob.archer.net/content/aspnet-mvc3-areas-separate-projects
Right click on the shell project and "Add Area...". Type in the area name. This will create an Areas folder with your area in it. (This is not 100% needed but you do need the "Areas" folder and you can steal the XXXXAreaRegistration class for your application.)
Create a new MVC3 empty project in your solution to match your area. Move the XXXXAreaRegistration.cs file from the shell mvc project to the new project and adjust the namespace as applicable. (Or you can manually create an area registration class, it's a pretty simple class. Just use the Add area template generated one as an example.)
Edit the routes in the AreaRegistration folder as needed.
Delete the folder under the areas folder that the template wizard added.
Modify the web.config of the new project and take out the connection strings and the authentication, membership, profile, rolemanger sections. You will not need to deploy this web.config but the razor intellisense doesn't work without it during dev time.
Delete the global.asax file from the area's project or you will get extra default routes.
Create a virtual directory in the "Areas" folder of the shell project with the name of your area as the alias and point it to your "area" project. You will need to use IIS or IIS Express for this. I use IIS. For IIS Express you can use the appcmd.exe in the IIS Express folder or you can edit the applciationhost.config file.
I want to be able to have a folder which allows regular access like the \content folder except that it holds a ClickOnce application. I can't seem to be able to achieve this using Mvc, but I'd like to have this folder accessible without Mvc seeing it as a controller action.
I tried using routes.Ignore(theUrl), but this seemed to have no effect.
There are two ways you can do this. The first is where you are currently going, which is to satisfy it with routing. You should be able to use the following to ignore the intended route:
routes.IgnoreRoute("...")
However, this might not be the right approach from a security stand point. I would recommend you define an explicit action to download your click-once exe. Have a look at this q/a as an example of using the FileContentResult class.
The reason for this is that you can control security for that file without having to open up access levels to other directories.
Edit: If this is for an entire directory, you can still follow this same approach.
Set up the folder as a virtual folder in the website on IIS. then you can set the url in the code to point to the machine serving the request and to the virtual folder on the web server.
I'm looking for a way to reference a shared external _layout.cshtml from MVC 3 and Razor.
A little back story:
We have multiple developers. All of them are working on separate MVC applications that all need the same look and feel. All these applications will be deployed to the same site for example
http://www.example.com/App1/
and
http://www.example.com/App2/
The look and feel will be generated by the CMS and dropped into a different folder
http://www.example.com/Layout/_layoutExt.cshtml
I've tried
MasterName = #"C:\inetpub\wwwroot\layout\_LayoutExt.cshtml";
But it gives me the error that it can't find the file
The view 'Index' or its master was not
found or no view engine supports the
searched locations. The following
locations were searched.
My eventual solution was to use Symbolic links (or junctions or hard links) to link the needed file into the view folder. This way the CMS writes to one location and my app reads from another. Not the clean solution I was looking for.
You'll probably need to make your own view engine that support reading file outside the web application home directory.