ELMAH is a poor example b/c its only got ONE way to configure it, it only runs in ASP.NET apps, etc. A more salient example is probably something like Castle.Core, StructureMap, etc. that has MANY ways to configure it. When you add Castle.Core, do you get a Castle.Config.xml file (probably NOT) --?
The challenge is that NuGet (in its present form) isn't nearly mature enough to provide the rich interaction that a more complex and configurable project like NH would really demand from a package manager in order to fully support our 'desired' user experience. Until that time, I think the NuGet-user-consumes-NH is going to remain decidedly sub-optimal. Steve Bohlen [email protected] http://blog.unhandled-exceptions.com http://twitter.com/sbohlen On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Patrick Earl <[email protected]> wrote: > Ya, I think you're right that as a core development project, we don't > really need to publish packages that are based on preference of > operating mode. I do however think that we need to provide packages > that actually save time and help the user, rather than just making > them do all the hard work themselves. The spirit of this is embodied > in the NuGet example video for Elmah. You install the package and it > configures your application immediately for use. I would be rather > disappointed if there was no help in this area and the nuget packages > only served as a fancy zip file with dlls. > > Patrick Earl > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> > wrote: > > What I mean with this is that the NH team should avoid to publish > packages > > where the main matter is: "This is my taste about how work with NH". > > As example try to write a post about: How implement session-per-request > in > > ASP.NET MVC3.(note: I didn't say how manage NH session in general). > > Or even a more simple post as: The best way to configure session-factory > > with NH3 > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:31 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 > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Fabio Maulo > > > > >
