I have a "white labelled" application that is installed onto multiple customers' servers. On any given installation the differences will include content, style sheets and graphics but also some actual code / business logic. I want my TFS Server to build all flavours of my application automatically. What are my options for doing this? e.g. should I be using Themes? What about #if conditional compilation flags.
P.S. The question is not about how to setup the Build Server - I've done that already.
For the business logic I would abstract the differences into a separate libraries, and then you can use an IoC / DI pattern or provider pattern to resolve the correct business logic at runtime.
As for the content I would look into themes. Essentially you could have your build server build all the code once, then when you package the code you choose which assemblies you need and use the appropriate configuration, and choose the appropiate theme folder for the client at hand.
I don't like using # directives in this case. If you think about it your unit tests would have to run for each conditional you have. If you remove the conditionals and abstract the differences your unit tests can just run on all the pluggable assemblies at once.
Content/image - you can make your own HtmlHelper/UrlHelper extension to do Html\Url.Content() to pickup right things for right customers, in addition to copying needed files from right folders (which is simple, /Content + /ContentCustomer1, 2, ...).
There's no single answer, I suppose. One easy answer would be to move your Order.Calculate() method to a partial class, so that you have
OrderPartsForCustomer1.cs
OrderPartsForCustomer2.cs
where you'll have
public partial class Order
{
public Money Calculate()
{
}
}
You'll just include needed .cs classes then, and don't clutter your code with #ifs.
If you want common code for all, and overrides just for specific customers, you can have OrderPartsCommon.cs, which you will copy/use if there's not customer-specific overide.
Related
I like the way F# requires to organize files and code in order of dependency because it discourages mindless coupling.
I have flat list of source files atm (simplified):
Common.fs
Workflow1.fs
Workflow2.fs
And want to go one step beyond. First, organize files like this (VS 2017 can't move folders up and down, one needs to edit .fsproj but it is different story - at least it is possible):
Common.fs
Workflow1\Impl1.fs
Workflow2\Impl2.fs
I expected Impl1.fs and Impl2.fs to be fully isolated from each other because their folders are not in parent/child relationship, but Impl2.fs can easily see types and functions from Impl1.fs: just open module and they are available
Are there any techniques to keep them isolated? It's possible to split the project in three however I prefer to keep DLL as a unit of deployment: workflows are small and ideally I want to avoid to have many tiny DLL files.
It sounds like you have a good understanding of what your options are. You are not missing anything else. Consequently, the answer to your question is, "no."
You can't isolate the folders that way, as far as I know. However, if you want to keep them isolated at compile time but deployable as a single unit, you can create separate projects and use Fody or ILMerge to combine the assemblies post-compilation.
VS2013, MVC5, VB
I am nearing the completion of a small project to manage the roles tables in a standard MVC5 application. The code is pretty much encapsulated. What are my options for using this 'package' in other projects?
Can I compile it into something? I know this type of action is possible, I'm just not familiar with the options available to me or the steps to do this. Links to sites that have tutorials are fine. Is creating a Nu Get package the only way to go, or is that even in the ballpark of what I'm asking. I say Nu Get, but I don't mean for public consumption, only for my consumption.
Will the finished 'whatever' include it's controller class, view models and views? Will I be able to easily manage updates? etc.
Creating a Nuget package is one way. I have created a local repository of common utilities for this purpose. But I usually use it just for DLLs. I use Nuget Package Explorer for its ease of use since its just me using the packages most of the time. Not sure its possible to place the files in specific directories.
Files in the content folder are copied to the root of your application when the package is installed. - Nuget
The alternative is to create an item template. I used to use this method for class files I want in my code but I can't see why you couldn't do it for the rest. Works well and isn't too hard to set up. There are dozens if not 100s of tutorials on the subject. Here is one on code project.
i know this is pretty general, but i couldnt find any suited information regarding this topic:
we need to develop a module-based system (ASP.NET-MVC) that should be adaptable for multiple different customers. Each of the modules can be customized for every company.
Is there some kind of tutorial on how to handle such complex requirements? (multiple customers that can have different compositions of modules and different module-implementations)
Can you recommend an approach on how to represent this structure in TFS?
How can the enrollment be done when each customer can have a different composition of modules.
Is there a recommended tool to keep track of all the versions that are enrolled on the different servers (staging, customers, ...)?
Would be really glad if someone could shed some light on that topic or at least throw some hints on what to exactly search for!
I am not sure if there is any tutorials but MVC its like a Class lib with views.
You can devide to components lets say you have module called payment, this module will include controllers, scripts, and views. To use this module you can have 2 options, 1. Create nuGet package with all content. Other option is to create zip file with content and just copy all to your project.
To use it for each customer would be simple since you divide all to different modules, and then you can include or exclude from your project.
As i mentioned i would use private Nuget server to handle packages then its really easy to add remove components just with few click. Also you can add build server where you can run unittests and if everything passed sucessfully then publish new nuget package
I understand how to implement a StructureMap registry, my question concerns the fact that every project that contains a StructureMap registry requires a static reference to the StructureMap assembly. Is there a best practice for how to structure the configuration for a large number of projects (30+) without forcing each project to take this dependency?
The alternative, I suppose, would be to create a bootstrapper assembly that could be referenced by the host process. The bootstrapper would perform all wire-up. In this scenario, the bootstrap assembly, instead, would have references to all of the projects. This has the upside of centralizing the reference to StructureMap so that all of the projects are unaware of StructureMap.
Using XML-based configuration is not an option for me.
Are there any other options for configuration that minimize the number of static references the projects in the solution must take? I'm guessing that there isn't, but thought I'd solicit some other opinions.
Technically, you only need a single project to reference the container framework, and that is the top-level application project. It references all the other projects and specifies the configuration of the components.
This puts the entire graph configuration out of the hands of each project, opting instead to define graphs only where they are used. This gives each application the complete freedom to configure components, rather than assuming the components will be used in the same way every time (as is implied by the registries which are inherent to each project).
An aside that may or may not be useful: in quantum physics, when we observe a particle, we collapse it from every possible state into a particular one. Frameworks are similar, in that they don't exist in a single state until they are observed, which here means "put to use in an application." This frames the application as the observer, which is the context in which the framework collapses into a single form.
Now, I generally wouldn't want the application be responsible for both being a running application and also configuring that runtime. For this reason, I tend to have a Composition project which references the others as well as the container framework. The actual application project can then reference the Composition project. This externalizes the registries from each project, including the application project, producing a cohesive assembly whose sole purpose is to define the composition of a particular application.
When building ASP.NET projects there is a certain amount of boilerplate, or plumbing that needs to be done, which is often identical across projects. This is especially the case with MVC and ALT.NET approaches. [I'm thinking of things such as: IoC, ORM, Solution structure (projects), Session Management, User Management, I18n etc.]
I would like to know what approach you find best for 'reusing' this plumbing across projects?
Have a 'master solution' which you duplicate and rename somehow? (I'm using a this to a degree at the moment, but it's fairly messy. Would be interested how people do this 'better')
Mainly rely on Shared Library projects? (I find this appropriate for some things, but too restrictive for things that have to be customised)
Code generation tools, such as T4? (Similar to the approach used by SharpArchitecture - have not tried this myself)
Something else?
Visual Studio supports Custom Templates.
I definitely (mostly!) go for T4 templates in conjunction with a modified version of SubSonic 3. I kind of use the database to model my domain and then use the T4 templates to generate the model and associated controllers and views. It takes about 50-60% of the effort out and keeps a consistency in place.
I then work on overrides (partials) of the classes along with filters and extension methods to 'make the app'. Now that I'm familiar with the environment and what I'm doing, I can have a basic model with good plumbing in place in a very short space of time. More importantly, because I create a set of partial class files, I can regenerate all I want without losing any of my 'custom' coding.
It works for me anyway :)
You could do it the bearded, t-shirted, agile style and create a nice template and put it in sourcecontrol. So when you need a new project, you just checkout the template?
For insanely fast MVC site setup, I use modified T4 templates (created with T4 Editor) and with ALOT of help from Oleg Sych's blogs for page generation (for your typical add/edit/index pages) combined with an awesome implementation of an automated create-update-delete called MVCCrud (if LINQ-to-SQL is your preferred data access method)
Using modified T4 templates and MVCCrud you can create fully functional entities (Create/Edit/List/Delete) with error handling and intuitive error messages in about 4 minutes for each.
I create a new project using the new project wizard so that I get unique project GUIDs assigned. Then I would use "Add Existing Item" to copy items from similar projects if it made sense to do so.
I sometimes use a file diff tool to copy references from one project to another, otherwise I just add the references by hand. A file diff tool can also be used to include similar source files, but the underlying files have to be copied anyway, so I prefer "Add Existing Item".
I've used T4 to generate solution and project files, but that definitely seems like an edge case and not something that would normally be necessary. In that case, I'd probably wrap the T4 in a PowerShell like script to create and populate the rest of the directory structure.
I use "shared libraries" pretty aggressively in general, but not specifically due to this scenario.
In general, I don't find myself reusing plumbing between projects much. It's probably more often that I hack away in one "prototype" project, then abandon it, and rebuild the project from scratch following the above approach and only bring over the "non-hacky" code.
I'm creating a MVC2 application template at http://erictopia.com. It will contain all the basic items I think should be in a MVC project. These include BDD specifications, an ORM (NHibernate and possibly Lightspeed), T4 templates, custom providers, ELMAH support, CSS/Javascript minifier, etc.