When you start creating an application or site in ASP.NET MVC, what do you do before typing in that first line of code?
I'm personally fond of creating a new ASP.NET MVC Web Application project and then cleaning out controllers/views until I have what is essentially a blank project (i.e. it runs but doesn't offer functionality). Then I start working on my model and adding controllers/views as needed.
I've also read about starter kits and sample applications but I have not yet started actively working with any of them. However, in my reading I have seen authors suggest that it might be good to start off with an existing template and build on it.
I'm trying to determine if there are better ways of starting off a project such that time is saved and/or the resulting deliverable is of higher quality.
The other things I do (I also clear out the controller/views etc)
Put an IOC in place.
Put ELMAH into the project.
Then I grab a coffee and write my first test.
Kindness,
Dan
PS: At some point I shall get around to creating a template for this so I don't redo it everytime. As soon as I decide upon my favourite IOC. :-)
I usually clear out the Content folder as well and put in place a nice CSS reset file and/or a CSS framework like the 960 grid
Before starting any type of project you must know what you want to do. So take a sheet of paper and start writing on here:
The name of your application
Enumerate the features
Make a quick draft of the domain model (entities that you are going to have)
Try finding the ways (choosing a technology) you are going to do different stuff like: data access, validation (client and server side), logging, IoC, Security, Caching etc.
Do a quick draft of all the views you are going to have in your application
Identify any other problems you might need to solve/implement/develop and think how are you going to do that
Related
This may sound like a dumb question on the surface, but why does the Hot Towel SPA Template include Breeze at all?
I've been spending the last few days learning Hot Towel and its dependencies, and as far as I can tell, nothing in the template actually uses Breeze. Perhaps that is going to change with some future release?
Sure, Breeze is a good library. But it's bound to CRUD methodology and requires you design your ApiControllers a particular way. (Metadata, SaveChanges, etc.) see here
It also guides you to Entity Framework. While this is more of a soft-dependency, since Breeze also shows a sample without it, it still guides you down a similar pattern of implementation using a modified repository pattern.
If you are using a NoSQL datastore, or CQRS patterns instead of CRUD, then Breeze becomes very difficult to use. There are alternative libraries for data access that work well in this style, such as AmplifyJS.
But the rest of Hot Towel is excellent! I especially like Durandal. So the question begs, if the template isn't actually doing any data access - why include any data access component at all? It would be better to ship it without Breeze, and if the end-user wants to use Breeze, or Amplify, or whatever - then so be it. The rest of Hot Towel would continue to shine as a great SPA implementation.
Matt - Good question. Since I created it I guess I should answer :)
When I built the template I had a focus on providing enough to get folks going with the right tools, and just enough starter code to guide the way. I did not want anyone ripping out code. I'm not a fan of templates that start you down a path and make you remove tons of files and code and change direction. Those are samples.
Samples are good. In fact, samples can be excellent (like the other templates, which I feel are more like samples). Those serve another purpose: to show how you can do things.
Back to the Hot Towel template ...if I include code that uses Breeze, I would be tempted to add a datacontext.js and a model.js on the client. They would contain data access code and code to extend the models on the client. Then I would be tempted to add a controller, some server side models, an ORM and a database. Once there, I'd want to use the data in multiple screens, which leads me to more Knockout and caching with Breeze. Then I might be tempted to add editing, which would lead to change tracking. Soon I have a full blown app. Or more conservatively, I have a sample again. While these approaches would provide more guidance on how to put these together, they would not help you "get started" with a template where you can just start building and adding your own code. If I stop short of some of these features, it's still walking down a road that requires you to change how I did it.
As it stands today, HotTowel is pretty darn close to a template in the truest sense. You create a new project and you are off and adding your own code.
You could argue (and you may be) that Breeze shouldn't be in there since I don't use it in the template. Nor do I use moment.js, BTW. However, I argue that they are both excellent libraries that I would not want to build a CRUD based SPA without them. Breeze is flexible, as you suggest, so you don't have to walk a specific path.
The best way to understand the value of Breeze is to build an app that has its features but without Breeze. Then you can see how much code that takes and how involved it is. For one such example, see my intermediate level SPA course at Pluralsight where I do exactly this: http://jpapa.me/spaps
So you ask "why Breeze?" ... because I strongly recommend it for building a SPA.
Thanks for asking and good luck !
Thanks for asking the question.
John, as author of HT, has offered an answer. I, as a principal of the Breeze project, am inclined to agree with him :)
HotTowel generates a foundation for you to build upon. It is not the building itself.
It is a foundation intended for a specific kind of application, a CRUD application based on a specific set of cooperating JavaScript and ASP.NET technologies. Breeze is a contributor ... but not the only one. Knockout, with its MVVM design and 2-way data binding, is particularly well-suited to the data-entry tasks typical of CRUD apps.
Of course there are other kinds of SPAs. There's an important class of apps that mostly present information and accept little user input. Such apps don't benefit as much from data binding and the people who write them can get pretty hostile about data binding in general and KO in particular.
My point is that HT targets a particular class of application ... one that happens to be immensely successful at least when measured by sustained popularity. It delivers the goods for people who build those apps. It may not be the right starting place for other kinds of apps.
It is true that the easy road to Breeze runs through Web API, EF, and a relational database. Take those away, and you may writing more code on the server (and a little more on the client). That may be the perfect trade-off for you.
The authors of Breeze would like to make that path easier. I don't think BreezeJS makes it harder. I don't understand your statement "Breeze becomes very difficult to use." Have you tried it?
Your client can communicate with any HTTP resource in any manner you chose. It is pretty easy to use existing Web API controllers (albeit easier with Breeze Web API controllers). You can use amplify.js if you prefer (btw, you can tell Breeze to make AJAX calls with amplify). You don't even have to use the Breeze EntityManager to query and save data if you don't want to.
The rest of BreezeJS may still have value for you. There remains plenty of work to do after you've figured out how you'll retrieve and store data and whether you prefer Entity-ChangeSet style or Command/Query style.
You'll have to find answers to these questions:
How will you shape the raw JSON data into bindable objects?
How will you hold on to these objects and share them across multiple screens without making redundant round-trips to the server?
How will you navigate from one object to a related object as you do when binding an Address to a combobox of StatesAndProvinces?
How will you track changes?
How will you validate them?
How will you store some or all of the data in local storage when the app "tombstones"?
Breeze can help with these chores even if you don't want it to query and save for you.
And if you're answer remains "I'll do all of that myself, thank you" ... well, removing Breeze from your HotTowel project is as easy as:
Uninstall-Package breeze.webapi
At the moment I am building a big project using:
ASP.Net MVC 4
jQuery (With some extra libraries)
Castle ActiveRecord (based on NHibernate)
Implemented users and roles using .Net Membership Provider
I built almost all the website, but some very relevant parts are missing still and I noticed that this CMS supports
ASP.Net MVC and NHibernate, and have almost all the features that I need already implemented.
The features that I still need to implement are:
Internal Search Engine
Comments
Version of content
Chat betwwen users
Users Profiles Page (Something like a very basic social network)
Forum
SEO
I don't know if is harder to use the CMS or if is better to add the features one by one manually.
I am worried about the time I spend learning and adapting to Orchard is the same time I would spent adding this
features manually.
Basically, the question is:
Should I move my solution to Orchard CMS or add everything manually ?
You can't just move your solution to Orchard, you could but i won't recommend it. Orchard is still MVC 3 at the base and that way most should work if you just move your solution including the database etc. But if you ask me, spending time to add the features manually is the way u should go.
In the Orchard Galery you can find existing many modules
Internal Search Engine
Lucene (Fully functional - Writen by the Orchard Team)
Comments
Already exists in the Orchard Core Module
Version of content
Already exists in the Orchard Framework functionalty
Users Profiles Page
Profile (Fully functional? Or at least good enough as example)
SEO
Several modules
Only 2 features u will have to write yourself
Chat between users
I can't find any example code for this, but I know Piotr Szmyd has tested SignalR inside a Orchard Module which, I think, will be usefull for a Chat module. Demo is here.
Forum
Nicholas Mayne made a start of a forum module which can be used as example or starting point, maybe you can help him extent it? Currently it's sort of a pre-alpha version :(
+1 to rfcdejon's answer. I ported my current project to Orchard after at 50-60% complete. I wish I had done it sooner due to the learning curve and time to integrate all the stuff I had already written, but overall it was the right choice.
If you have significant data already set up you should account for the extra time it will take to port that into Orchard. But if you are making an app from scratch with very little existing data that would make the switch to Orchard easier. Orchard is a great choice for anyone looking for a .NET CMS that supports MVC.
Some things to keep in mind:
Features you've already built will have to be converted into Orchard content types/parts in order to take advantage of things that come out of the box with Orchard, like search, comments, versioning, etc.
Orchard has its own users/roles system, so you might have to do some work to find a module for what you're already using, or override Orchard's user/membership system yourself.
Your entire app will have to become an Orchard app, and your existing MVC stuff will have to convert into an Orchard module. Existing data access code will have to be wrapped inside a using (new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Suppress)) {...}
Forums project has started but isn't done, so you will either be banking that it will finish in time for you to use it, or that you will be able to help get it working.
Introduction:
Now I know this question could be very broad and it would be too hard to answer without me asking something specific. So All I ask is just some direction, or a brief high level explanation of a design, or maybe there is already some framework out there that could help me get started...I'm not sure.. I have never designed a plugin architecture before, so maybe there is some resource/example you could point me to on the web that would help me learn so that I may come up with my own solution.
Details of my question:
My intention is I would like to create a plug-in architecture for a new pet-project that I am building in ASP.NET MVC.
I would like to design it so that it has some sort of plug-in ability for all, or at least most, of the application's components.
The reason I would like to do this, is so that I may be able to do deployments with nearly zero down time. The idea is that when I want to deploy the latest version I would drop in the new DLLs into a specific folder, and the application would load up the new plug ins and that is it.
For exapmle, lets say I add a new "contacts" feature to my web application where users can search, add and delete contacts. I would like to be able to deploy that by way of plugins.
Is something like this even possible for Web Applications? Or am I just dreaming?
It's definitely possible.
You will need to define a pretty comprehensive interface that represents everything your plugins will have to do. You should approach it by differentiating what is "core" to your application, and where the extensibility points are. For example, where will the plugins be accessed? Will they be tabs on a page, or links in a sidebar? What properties does each plugin need to have in order to fit into the plugin container?
Generally, plugins are enumerated via reflection by looking for assemblies that implement the plugin interface.
Just for encouragement, we've done this with an enterprise product that provides a generic framework for "management" interfaces for web sites. Developers just need to drop in a plugin dll that builds specific property pages, and they show up in the management interface menu, all the navigation is taken care of, and their dll's just have to worry about their own domain logic.
There is always the dll-way where you define some interfaces that plugins follow.
But for web application, especially ASP.NET MVC, you need a controller, views and so. Probably these can be included in a dll file using prepared controller factory to handle that, but it would be hard to develop these plugins.
Some inspiration for code (or db) embedded content: Haacked about that
ASP.NET MVC version 2 will support areas, where you can put some parts of the application into different folders within the app. This way you can just upload some files and the app will recognize these new files. Read more there Haacked blog
PS: I found another person here on S.O. asking the same question as me:
Plug-in architecture for ASP.NET MVC It might be useful for someone researching the same topic.
What is the best and cleanest way to implement A-B testing in asp.net mvc? That is, when we make new changes to an asp.net mvc web site, we want to test the new html/css/js with a certain subset of visitors (defined on cookie, login id, etc) and then analyze some metrics (page response time, number of pages visited, $$$ in sales, etc) afterwards to measure the level of success of the changes.
I am looking for a clean way to implement a way of choosing what view (html/css/js, etc...) to render using asp.net mvc.
Check out FairlyCertain (http://www.fairtutor.com/fairlycertain/) when you get a chance. It's a .NET A/B library that you can pretty much just drop into your project and start writing tests.
Unlike the Javascript libraries from Google and VisualWebsiteOptimizer, everything happens on the server so you don't suffer any performance, user experience or SEO issues. I've been using it in my stuff for a while now and it works quite well.
There is an A/B testing framework specifically for ASP.NET MVC. This is an open source software I wrote myself when, just like you, didn't find a free tool which works nicely with ASP.NET MVC and doesn't require much setup.
Google Content Experiments? It's a Javascript-based solution that doesn't require anything from your backend.
You include Google's Javascript on your page
The script randomly substitutes elements on your page as defined by your A/B test
Google's site shows you a nice breakdown of the results...
If you are using the spark view engine, you could probably do it with a variation of the theme filter (http://sparkviewengine.com/documentation/viewlocations#Extendingfilepatternswithdescriptorfilters). For each new visitor to the site, determine if you want them to see the existing or new version of the site and set a cookie. Wire up a descriptor filter that looks for the presence of the cookie and modify the view location to look in the folder containing the modified views. If an alternative view exists, the Spark engine will automatically render it in place of the "normal" view, otherwise it will render the normal view.
If you are using the normal WFVE, then the simplest way to manage this would be to define a folder under Views where your view alternatives live. When you want to provide an alternative view, you place it in a location that matches its position within the normal Views folder but rooted at the alternatives folder e.g. to provide an alternative to Views/Users/login.aspx place your new view at Views/Alternative/Users/login.aspx.
With a convention in place for locating your alternative views, you can extend the WebFormViewEngine and overload CreatePartialView / CreateView to inspect some aspect of the ControllerContext to determine whether to render the default or overloaded view and alter the path as appropriate e.g. changing .../Views/Users/login.aspx to .../Views/Alternative/Users/login.aspx.
I suggest you use Display Modes to achieve A/B testing.
But Display Modes just support simple problems by default.
If you already implement Display Modes in some other scenario. You can consider DisplayModeMatrix (just google it). It helps you use Display Modes more efficiency.
https://www.nuget.org/packages/DisplayModeMatrix/
Wth Display Modes you can simply delete/rename views after A/B testing to clean up your project.
I think there isn't a ready to use solution for this and you will have to improvise.
Try to override your current functionality in well defined points without breaking it. Explicitly draw a border where your regular code and A-B testing code lives.
Inversion of control principle might help a lot here too (i.e. - controller factory could provide derived controller instead of original one). For views&partialviews - you could change viewengine so it would try to look for 'MyPartialViewAB.ascx' instead of 'MyPartialView.ascx'.
And it might be a good idea to take a look what performance counters are (in case you haven't).
I've got a pretty simple site (around 8 pages) with only one way page containing any significant codebehind, and I'd like to try learning MVC, using it as the test.
Is it best to start a new MVC Web App from scratch and cut-and-paste the HTML in, or will it be easier to retool the existing files.
Basically, what am I in for? What's it gonna take to get my Web Forms app into the MVC model? What approach should I take? Create the default MVC web app and start cutting-and-pasting? Add the appropriate namespaces and learn to setup the MVC structure myself?
Unlike tvanfosson, I think you will actually learn more about MVC by trying to translate your existing application. You'll learn which assemblies to add, you'll work out how to associate the right http handlers, you'll learn what the correct web.config settings are, and you'll know which dependencies to remove from your web application to get it to work.
To be honest, it will feel harder doing it this way and be a little more frustrating, but at the end of the process you will know a hell of a lot more than just starting a new one from scratch. Good luck with it.
You'll want to start from a project template in a new project. Transfer your markup to your new views as needed, although it's more likely that you'll just be using the old site as a design template than actually reusing code. You'll find that MVC is much different than WebForms.
I don't think retooling the existing Web Forms application is the best approach (or even feasible). As you will surely discover, the differences between Web Forms and MVC are quite big. So, starting from scratch (although you can recycle the html) will most likely be the better approach and the best way to learn as much as possible about MVC.