Description
On publish, the assets are going into a folder with the same name as the app and web.config sits at the root of publish with rewrite rules to serve from {app_name}/dist.
publish
-- StandaloneApp
-- dist
-- _framework
-- css
-- index.html
-- web.config
... but I was expecting a much flatter structure akin to what has been done with ASP.NET Core ... something along the lines of ...
publish
-- _framework
-- css
-- index.html
-- web.config
I have the notion that dist is a holdover from other frameworks. Having the app name in the mix seems strange. Just wondering why it was setup this way?
Would it be an improvement to use the flatter structure (following the ASP.NET Core publishing philosophy these days)? The structure is simpler and the rewrite rules can be dropped. There might be an additional reason to use the flatter structure: My understanding was that the web.config was placed into a flat structure in ASP.NET Core because it allows publishing of multiple apps with WebDeploy. cc/ @shirhatti