How long until you have 1st class support for .net applications? That would sure make a difference for me, speaking as a prospective customer. 
2 Likes
Hi @jallen
Is there any particular feature you’re after? You can already deploy .net 5/6 applications on fly by packaging the binary inside a docker container using Dockerfile and deploying to fly.
+1 on a build pack for .NET. Why make it harder for customer than really necessary? And if I understood it correctly, nothing is running on Docker anyways - so it’s just a weird artifact around deployment.
There is a buildpack for dotnet which works, but it’s adding 5 minutes to the deploy over using the Dockerfile (!). Is this to be expected, @charsleysa ?
toml I setup to get it working:
[build]
- dockerfile = "./MyWebApp.Dockerfile"
+ builder = "paketobuildpacks/builder-jammy-full"
+ buildpacks = ["paketo-buildpacks/dotnet-core"]
+[build.args]
+ BP_DOTNET_PROJECT_PATH="./src/MyWebApp"
We’re not really making it harder for .NET. We made it easy for Docker, then started making it easy for other frameworks (Phoenix, Laravel, Rails, Django, Remix). We haven’t gotten to .NET yet!
Buildpacks are slow and we kind of regret enabling them. If you can write a Dockerfile, it’s a much better experience. Someday we’ll write a .NET Dockerfile for you.
2 Likes
Ah, nice. I was hoping I could get rid of the Dockerfile I used for deploying to Heroku, is all (Heroku only supported .NET via Docker). But ok, if that’s the recommended approach, I’ll stick to the Dockerfile – especially as the buildpacks are so slow.
Thanks for explaining!
1 Like
btw, the latest version of .NET (.NET 7) has support for auto-generating a Dockerfile, so maybe you don’t have to write a .NET Dockerfile either.
Added dotnet