Yes, I don't think that NH 'starter kits' for various scenarios are (necessarily) something that need to be the responsibility of the entire NH project (to build, maintain, support, answer questions for, etc.).
But all the same, I'd like to see someone make them available if NuGet really supports this project-level distribution of content. Steve Bohlen [email protected] http://blog.unhandled-exceptions.com http://twitter.com/sbohlen On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > Guys. > NuGet is free. > You can create your : > FullAspNetMvc3WithRazorAnd_StructureMap_BaseEntity_QueriableRepo_NH3_NHV_NHSP_NHE.nuspec > in your local machine or in "your own space"in NuGet-gallery > as: > JhonWhite.FullAspNetMvc3WithRazorAnd_StructureMap_BaseEntity_QueriableRepo_NH3LinFu_NHV_NHSR_NHSP_NHE.nuspec > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Stephen Bohlen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Well, it shows that you're continually thinking :) >> >> Here's my comments (more or less in order of your ideas)... >> >> - re: including (consistent) categories (ByteCode, Database, etc.) in >> the package names: good idea, I like it and it makes a lot of sense to me >> - re: changing config files in addition to just adding assemblies, I >> fear that this is anything but straightforward given the many, many ways >> one >> can now configure NH (app.config/web.config, hibernate.cfg.xml, Loquacious >> code-config, etc.); I'd hate to have a package manager register the >> ProxyFactoryFactory in hibernate.cfg.xml when the whole rest of my config >> was in my web.config or in code -- it would be the *last* place I'd look >> to >> see WTF was going on with my app when all hell breaks loose after I add >> the >> package <g>; this probably needs so serious consideration re: how it would >> ever work; not dismissing it, just suggesting its a non-trivial problem to >> solve >> - re: a dummy package that just contains a 'getting started.txt' file, >> to me this seems mostly contrary to the concept of NuGet as >> add-assemblies-to-my-project, but I don't dismiss it out of hand entirely; >> what do others think about this strategy--? >> - re: 'starter packages' like Nhibernate.Example.AspNet, I like this >> idea (a LOT) but I'm not certain how simple it is to actually deliver what >> amounts to an entire new project infrastructure via NuGet; some >> experimenting with this seems to be warranted to better understand the >> limitations of this kind of unintended use of NuGet >> >> >> Steve Bohlen >> [email protected] >> http://blog.unhandled-exceptions.com >> http://twitter.com/sbohlen >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Patrick Earl <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Okay, my brain won't shut up. >>> >>> I had the thought that packages like NHibernate.Example.AspNet or >>> NHibernate.Full.AspNet could be offered. These combined packages >>> could have all appropriate dependencies to get up and running in a >>> particular scenario. The fact of the matter is that the NHibernate >>> world is so flexible and wide-reaching, that it's hard to pre-decide >>> on an exact set of packages the user might need. I would think it >>> would be more clear in the end to have simple packages and then >>> combine them either through "example" packages or documentation. >>> >>> Patrick Earl >>> >> >> > > > -- > Fabio Maulo > >
