Not only that, my friend...... Castle.Core is just another "*Core Services; not intended to be consumed by itself*"
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Stephen Bohlen <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >> > >> > >> > > -- Fabio Maulo
