RC3: what's in/out

[Hamilton Verissimo]

Hey all,

So the 1.0 branch is almost OK, the next step is the Wix setup wizard.
And then it comes down to decide what is going to be on it. We have
the option to include the whole contrib as a separated file (zip) but
that might mislead people to think that we support it. Offering it as
a separated download is another option.

What I like best is to include a few contrib projects that have proven
their value, are documented and supported. I'd like to include,
provided that everyone is OK with that:

- CVSI (need to figure out how)
- ActiveWriter (ditto)
- MR ViewComponents

The other contributions are being left out due to either lack of
documentation of lack of support. I've seen questions popping here in
this list and not being fully appreciated. This can be reviewed for
the 1.0 release, though, so dont need to curse me.

From the main trunk, I'd like to leave some things out. Namely:

- DictionaryAdapter (what is it for anyway?)
- Facilities:
- Cache (stalled)
- Db4o (license issues)
- DynamicLoader (no documentation whatsoever)
- EnterpriseLibrary (stalled)
- iBatisNet (stalled)
- Prevalence (stalled)
- Synchronize (no documentation at all)
- Wcf (no documentation and it's not even a facility)
- ManagementExtensions (stalled)
- Security (stalled)

Obviously, everything is open to discussion.

Thanks

--
Cheers,
hamilton verissimo
ham...@castlestronghold.com
http://www.castlestronghold.com/

[Ken Egozi]

DictionaryAdapter is a very useful utility that generates a typed wrapper (based on an Interface Hierarchy) around dictionaries.

I'd vote -1 for leaving that out. Besides, anyone who uses the CodeGenerator is using that one too.

on that notion - +1 for adding CodeGenerator.

I'd also like to know what I should do in order to get AspView into the mix.
As for value - well we use it at MusicGlue for all our web development, on all our production sites.
I know of at least one solid startup in Israel that had embraced MR only when they were presented with AspView (on my MR/AspView talk).

Support - well, I haven't noticed questions about that and I monitor the dev and users list. Nothing in the forum, too (I'm searching for 'AspView' from time to time).

Documentation - well that is probably the problem. I think I could try and duplicate NV and Brail docs and convert the code samples. Is that the missing link?

[Hamilton Verissimo]

On 9/6/07, Ken Egozi <ego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> DictionaryAdapter is a very useful utility that generates a typed wrapper
> (based on an Interface Hierarchy) around dictionaries.
>
> I'd vote -1 for leaving that out. Besides, anyone who uses the CodeGenerator
> is using that one too.

Fair enough. But I'd need that it be documented. The stub is right
here https://svn.castleproject.org/svn/castle/site/xdocs/components/dictionaryadapter/index.xml

> on that notion - +1 for adding CodeGenerator.

More than often I see people bringing complains and problems about it,
and I dont see most of them being replied. It also adds a layer of
complexity that I'd rather leave for people that stand in a different
level, enough to grab it and make it work themselves with the aid of
some documentation or blog post.

> I'd also like to know what I should do in order to get AspView into the mix.

Does it work with the trunk code? I remember that you said you have a
different version of the trunk with some changes applied.

[Ken Egozi]

1. I'll try to start doc-ing the DictionaryAdapter. Never xdoc-ed so I hope it's go smooth.
2. I agree that it adds a bit of complexity, as you need to setup the msbuild target, and to setup the msbuild task to your web's csproj. But it's a one time setup fee, that turns monorail development into much more fun. I'd try and write at least a blog post about it.
3. AspView's trunk is matching Castle's trunk.

There is a branch of AspView that relies on MR-302, as it adds support for using multiple CompiledViews assemblies, and it needs 302 that is needed so the view sources won't need to reside on the website's filesystem.

On 9/6/07, Hamilton Verissimo <ham...@castlestronghold.com> wrote:

[Ken Egozi]

Ok, initial docs on DictionaryAdapter:

[Gökhan Altınören]

I'd love to see AW included, but we might have an issue. ActiveWriter source is Apache licensed, but binary release includes DSL Tools redistributable (must), which is under MS' VSIP SDK License. So I licensed the whole setup as "As Is" with the notification below. VSIP SDK allows you to release your code under an OSS license but I'm not sure if we can tag the install binaries as Apache v2. If we can (while stating the exceptional binaries and their license), I can convert it from as is to Apache v2.

VS2008 will have DSL Tools redist (since Linq to SQL also uses it.) and problem will go away, though.

ActiveWriter Binaries License:

Except where otherwise noted, all of the documentation and software included

in the ActiveWriter package distributed in binary form is copyrighted by Gokhan Altinoren.

Copyright (C) 2006 Gokhan Altinoren. All rights reserved.

This software is provided "as-is," without any express or implied warranty.

In no event shall the author be held liable for any damages arising from the

use of this software.

Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose and to redistribute source code generated by the tool or binaries compiled from that source code, provided that the following conditions are met:

1. Your usage of the software must not violate Microsoft Visual Studio SDK license.

2. All redistributions in binary form must retain all occurrences of the

   above copyright notice and web site addresses that are currently in

   place (for example, in the Readme document).

3. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not

   claim that you wrote the original software, or rename the binaries. If you use this software to

   distribute a product, an acknowledgment in the product documentation

   would be appreciated but is not required.

Exceptions:

The following files included in ActiveWriter installation distributed in binaries form are subject to the Microsoft Visual Studio SDK License (
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/extend) (the SDK License):

·
         DSLToolsRedist.msi

·         
Setup.exe

You are required to agree to terms that protect above items explained in the SDK License mentioned above.

[Lee Henson]

FWIW I wrote some docs on the Castle.Tools.CodeGenerator on the using
site a while ago:

http://using.castleproject.org/display/Contrib/Castle.Tools.CodeGenerator

And I've tried to help anyone out who has had difficulties with it,
but I haven't seen many of them.

[Ken Egozi]

I thought about linking from the DA docs to that page, is it ok to do so? (links from docs to 'using', as 'using' is a kinda wiki so the link mught break some day).

I would've made a copy of that into the docs, however it might introduce a dependency in a Contrib project.
I think I would anyway add a page about using a baseController<IView, ISession> to achieve TypedSession, TypedF, TypedPB.

@hammet: is what I did sufficient to act as docs for that component so it'd make it way into RC3?

[Jonathon Rossi]

I would really like CVSI to be included.

I'm not sure if there is any licensing problems with the
"Microsoft.VisualStudio.*.dll" binaries (in C:\Program Files\Castle Visual
Studio Integration) I have distributed with the setup. We might have to
include a notice similar to what ActiveWriter will have.

CVSI is pretty easy to install, I can send you the *.reg file that needs to
be merged into the registry and then there are a few binaries (2x Castle, 8x
Microsoft) and an icon.

Regards, Jonathon Rossi

[Ken Egozi]

CVSI is a major sell-point for the MR/NV stack.
If possible, +2 for including that.

[Jonathon Rossi]

Thanks, it’ll get much better in the next month and a bit ;-)

 

Regards, Jonathon Rossi

<br

[Tim Haines]

Yeah - I'd hate to go back to a non-CVSI'ed VS.  Both of my thumbs are up too.  If only sticking a thumb in the air could make the task easier to do..

Jono - I forgot to mention - I know someone who said he'd buy you a crate of beer when the compiler with intellisense is done.  ;-)  I'll be reminding him when it is.

Tim.

[Jonathon Rossi]

I didn’t realise it had such a positive effect. I guess it is probably because I haven’t done a lot of MR development lately.

 

A crate of beer, lol, too bad it would cost more in postage. Maybe I’ll have to set up a “donate to my open source efforts” like Ayende has ;-)

 

I guess intellisense can be shipped with RC4\RTM. However, I’ll be releasing the binary update releases as I have been lately.

 

Regards, Jonathon Rossi

From: castle-pro...@googlegroups.com [mailto:castle-pro...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim Haines
Sent: Thursday, 6 September 2007 7:47 PM
To: castle-pro...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: RC3: what's in/out

 

Yeah - I'd hate to go back to a non-CVSI'ed VS.  Both of my thumbs are up too.  If only sticking a thumb in the air could make the task easier to do..

[Craig Neuwirt]

My bad.  I'll document SynchronizeFacility ASAP.

[josh robb]

Applied. Thanks!

> I thought about linking from the DA docs to that page, is it ok to do so?
> (links from docs to 'using', as 'using' is a kinda wiki so the link mught
> break some day).

IMO - I think it's fine - we link to other external docs. (NH, blog posts etc).

> @hammet: is what I did sufficient to act as docs for that component so it'd
> make it way into RC3?

Personally - having just read the docs - I think so. It's actually
pretty fricking cool. I might try using it on my WebForms :( project.

j.

[Ken Egozi]

I've had nothing do to with that, it's all eleutian + Lee (and maybe a few others).

My IL skills are rusty at best.

[Jeff Brown]

Seems reasonable to me.

I wouldn't mind seeing the contrib caching components going into trunk
and used to replace the MonoRail cache components (no Windsor
dependencies) since they're more reusable. But that can happen
post-RC3.

(And they're documented and tested with 99% coverage...)

Keep pushing for RTM... :-)
Jeff.

-----Original Message-----
From: castle-pro...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:castle-pro...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Hamilton
Verissimo
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 8:39 PM
To: castle-pro...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RC3: what's in/out

[Ruprict]

I currently use the WCF (um, non-) facility and it is very useful. I
would be happy to do some doco on it, but I might need a nudge from
Orin or others on:

1) Where it fits, if it's not a facility.
2) Make sure my doco is not totally wrong.

I am (as I am sure you know) not really a contributor, but we all have
to stop somewhere, right?

Any interest?
Glenn

On Sep 5, 11:38 pm, "Hamilton Verissimo"

> hamm...@castlestronghold.comhttp://www.castlestronghold.com/

[Hamilton Verissimo]

Yes, big interest. Thanks in advance.

[Hamilton Verissimo]

On 9/6/07, Jonathon Rossi <jo...@jonorossi.com> wrote:

> CVSI is pretty easy to install, I can send you the *.reg file that needs to
> be merged into the registry and then there are a few binaries (2x Castle, 8x
> Microsoft) and an icon.

Please. I'll be waiting.

[Hamilton Verissimo]

On 9/6/07, Gökhan Altınören <gok...@altinoren.com> wrote:
> I'd love to see AW included, but we might have an issue. ActiveWriter source
> is Apache licensed, but binary release includes DSL Tools redistributable
> (must), which is under MS' VSIP SDK License. So I licensed the whole setup
> as "As Is" with the notification below. VSIP SDK allows you to release your
> code under an OSS license but I'm not sure if we can tag the install
> binaries as Apache v2. If we can (while stating the exceptional binaries and
> their license), I can convert it from as is to Apache v2.

Understood. I'll list it on the downloads page then.

[Ayende Rahien]

It is actually the reverse from a facility, since it is external integration, not internal.
I would be very grateful to have anyone contribute documentations, so feel free to put them somewhere where I can take a peek.

On 9/7/07, Ruprict <glenn.g...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Ruprict]

How's this look as a start:

http://www.goodrichs.net/castle/container/facilities/v1rc3/wcf/index.html

On Sep 9, 6:48 am, "Ayende Rahien" <aye...@ayende.com> wrote:
> It is actually the reverse from a facility, since it is external
> integration, not internal.
> I would be very grateful to have anyone contribute documentations, so feel
> free to put them somewhere where I can take a peek.
>

[Hamilton Verissimo]

Looking good!

[Ruprict]

So, I have put a couple of zip files out there, one for the trunk and
one for rc3. If the content is wrong (Orin or anyone that has an
opinion) lemme know. Each zip has:

- new index.xml for the facilities doc dir with a new <li> for the WCF
doc
- patch file for above
- new wcf dir with index.xml

If this is wrong, lemme know.

Oh, I couldn't figure out how to attach a file to my post (I guess I
coulda used a traditional mail cilent, but, er, I didn't wanna, I
guess) so here are the links:

http://www.goodrichs.net/castle/patches/trunk_facility_wcf_doc_add.zip
http://www.goodrichs.net/castle/patches/v1rc3_facility_wcf_doc_add.zip

That work?

On Sep 10, 3:19 pm, "Hamilton Verissimo"
<hamm...@castlestronghold.com> wrote:
> Looking good!

>
> On 9/10/07, Ruprict <glenn.goodr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > How's this look as a start:
>

> >http://www.goodrichs.net/castle/container/facilities/v1rc3/wcf/index....

> hamm...@castlestronghold.comhttp://www.castlestronghold.com/

[James Curran]

Assuming you are using the gmail web interface (http://mail.google.com/mail/), in the bit between the textbox for the reply and the "To:" box there's a line of links: " Add Cc | Add Bcc | Edit Subject | Attach a file"

[Hamilton Verissimo]

Applied, thanks!

On 9/12/07, Ruprict <glenn.g...@gmail.com> wrote:
>