Interesting find ... http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471788163/godnn-20/103-3009994-3023812?creative=327641&camp=14573&link_code=as1

Forward planing?  Due May 29, 2006

Ok, this beggs the question, is the next release 3.2 or 4.0.  Kind of like 3.0 was origionally, I think, 2.2?

Is this more of a joke?  I thought the Publisher was WROX, and not Hungry Minds Inc?

 

3.2 and 4.0 will be released together.

3.2 will be for .Net 1.1/VS 2003 development
4.0 will be for .Net 2.0/VS 2005 development

4.0 will basically be a VS 2005 port of 3.2

3.2 will RUN on .Net 2.0.

both codebases will be supported and enhanced for some (yet to be determined) period of time going forward.

more info will be officially availible as we get closer

As for the book, I personally have no idea, but it would not surprise me if another book was going to be done.

Looks like a revised version of the current book. May 2006, Yuck. I hope 3.2 comes sooner than that.

it will

cool. I added the book to my wish list. As an owner of the current 2 availalbe, I hope this book is not a large overlap of the current wrox release ....just the for the new version of dnn.

it would be cool if it had more module development in it. :)

I see 3 types of people or 3 different ways in which you use DotNetNuke:
--Using (You manage dnn site or sites (portal / portals) for some purpose)
--Admin or Host (You manage a DNN install as a host...this would include installation)
--Developer (you make skins and/or modules and/or other stuff)

JWhite wrote:

3.2 and 4.0 will be released together. 3.2 will be for .Net 1.1/VS 2003 development 4.0 will be for .Net 2.0/VS 2005 development 4.0 will basically be a VS 2005 port of 3.2 3.2 will RUN on .Net 2.0. both codebases will be supported and enhanced for some (yet to be determined) period of time going forward. more info will be officially availible as we get closer As for the book, I personally have no idea, but it would not surprise me if another book was going to be done.

I am afraid.

Isn't this mean that the Module Developer, would have to have two parallel code-sets ? (or may be three, if DNN 2.2 is also needed to be supported, like for CataLook )

We are still working on the options, but from what I understand, a module written for 1.1 will run on both 1.1 and 2.0 most of the time. We'll be discussing this more as we get closer. Charles Nurse & Shaun Walker are really the 2 people heading up this area at the moment.

What's happening with the markup produced by DNN 4.0 in regards to web standards?

smcculloch wrote:

We are still working on the options, but from what I understand, a module written for 1.1 will run on both 1.1 and 2.0 most of the time. We'll be discussing this more as we get closer. Charles Nurse & Shaun Walker are really the 2 people heading up this area at the moment.

I think it is going to be real confusing

If the version for 1.1, is going to run on 2.0, most Module Developers would not switch over to 2.0 (why make two sets ?) Besides, I am sure, in order to do that, something will have to be compromised.

I feel, 2.0 one (i.e. DNN 4.0) should shirk all the extra baggage, and what ever "breaking changes" are needed, should be done at this stage (including new DAL), so that we can all sail safely with further versions

I can't wait to see the forums and gemini when two versions are released  :)

Overlap is generally done to help transition everyone. If you want to go with the future (vs2k5), then move to 4.0. If you are more cautious, just stick with 3.2. I guess it will also depend on when your host will have ASP.Net 2.0 avail too. But if your host has it available AND you have no need to modify the source then there probably isn't any reason to use the 4.0.

DeveloperMCDBA wrote:

As an owner of the current 2 availalbe, I hope this book is not a large overlap of the current wrox release ....just the for the new version of dnn. it would be cool if it had more module development in it. :) I see 3 types of people or 3 different ways in which you use DotNetNuke: --Using (You manage dnn site or sites (portal / portals) for some purpose) --Admin or Host (You manage a DNN install as a host...this would include installation) --Developer (you make skins and/or modules and/or other stuff)

Perhaps the team should consider two books:
1) Using and Administering DotNetNuke 4.0, and
2) Developing for and Enhancing DotNetNuke 4.0

This might allow for more revenue (two books), or lower cost books more targeted to the different audiences.  Why should one buy the history and noobie content again if they already own the DNN3 book??? 

Why should a simple user buy chapters on development if they will never do any???  They could scale down the Using/Administering book, which not being as thick might seem much more approachable to novices--and as a slimmer reference might be kept more readily at hand (anyone have pocket guides to other packages?). 

Then also the Developing/Enhancing book would be free of the noobie baggage and that buys space for more detailed technical info and best practices chapters!!!  Perhaps the Core Team could consider requiring the purchase of this advanced reference as a pre-requisite to the coming certification process?  This additional depth of info would need to be written and disclosed by the Core Team and then studied by the developers anyway--why not turn this into part of the revenue stream that would pay to support the certification activities???

IndianGuru wrote:

I think it is going to be real confusing If the version for 1.1, is going to run on 2.0, most Module Developers would not switch over to 2.0 (why make two sets ?) Besides, I am sure, in order to do that, something will have to be compromised. I feel, 2.0 one (i.e. DNN 4.0) should shirk all the extra baggage, and what ever "breaking changes" are needed, should be done at this stage (including new DAL), so that we can all sail safely with further versions

As phr0ze said it's necessary for a transitioning period in this case and the earlier we present the options, the earlier the community will plan for and implement it and the earlier we will be able to move to a VS 2005/ .Net 2.0 only setup as demand for the 3.x series dies down.

Additionally, here are other reasons (to name a few):
1) If we only release a DNN 3.2 version, what happens to all the developers that buy/install VS 2005 and can't develop for DNN? They will likely go somewhere else.
2) We made so many breaking changes in 3.0 that we promised no more breaking changes for the next year. We are trying to stick to that.
3) While DNN 4.0/VS2005 requires lots of file reorganization and a slightly different (though possibly a little easier) development environment, the code is probably 99+% identical but the files themselves are organized differently.  Therefore, the extra effort to support 2 code bases (for now) is acceptable to the core team given what we expect the community demand for a VS 2005 solution to be.

Going forward, we will support both code bases and will likely enhance both with applicable minor enhancemnts but the 4.x version MAY get a few .Net 2.0 specific enhancements at some point as demand and resources allow.

As I've stated before, if you are interested, please read Shaun's and Charles' blogs as they provide a lot of insight into the issues identified and the solutions proposed.  There is much work is still being done in identifying upgrade scenarios and their associated procedures so that's why there hasn't been a lot of "official" information on the subject as of yet but the above info should constitute the bulk of the DNN strategy for .Net 2.0/VS 2005.

:) good points!

Hey Nik, when can I buy your book?? http://blogs.speerio.net/peerio/CategoryView,category,My%20Book.aspx