-
Role based security
-
The object guy has
an extension on the intrinsic role based security of .NET. You can find it
here.
-
IDE Hell
-
Could
everyone who uses Visual Studio.Net, and plans on distributing/bequeathing their
code to anyone else, please give a thought to people who don't use it? I'm
sure it's a lovely environment that makes you x times more productive than me,
but be aware that VS.Net can be very invasive to source code. You know (I
hope) what I'm talking about: ... (see link for full story)
[http://dotnetweblogs.com/JArnold/archive/02212003.aspx#2740]
I say Partial classes
and Preprocessor Symbols!
- On the subject of partial classes: maybe in .NET V2 they
will put this kind of designer stuff in a partial class.
- On the subject of Preprocessor Symbols: This may provide
to be a workaround in .NET V1. You can put your preprocessor symbol using an
#if #endif around this VS.NET support code. Read up in the SDK docs.
#if ISVSNET
//VSNET code
#elif
//You're opensource ~ other IDE code
#endif
Ofcourse, you're
refering to "other people's code" (so don't think I missed the point). The
problem is that during the development of .NET, design choices where
made (and now I'm particularly refering to the InitializeComponent) by its
designers which are not always what we want. Let me put it
another way: this is not always a world of choice.
On another note, if you
download code like that(the hit the F5 button type), I can't imagine you can use it for anything more than
evaluation and learning purposes (and won't spend your time removing the
comments, regions, etc...). A bigger problem is converting
the .sln file to a NAnt build file (a starting point is Gordon Weakliem's Radio Weblog - I believe there's also a tool that converts between the two formats).
#Develop is an IDE that understands both regions,
windows forms designer support code and XML
comments.
-
Download IE webcontrols
-
I probably won't have
been the first to notice this, but just in case, the ie webcontrols have
become opensource [http://www.asp.net/IEWebControls/Download.aspx].
-
What's your versioning scheme?
-
I always
wondered how other people version their .NET assemblies. What
seems to be obvious at first (Major.Minor.Build.Revision) becomes harder as
you have to deliver support and patches once a product has been installed at
a customer's site and meanwhile development for the next version (be it a minor one)
is well on it's way. How do I create a patch (read bugfix) for the version
that my customer has? This is a problem - and correct me if I'm wrong - I
don't see in opensource projects as one can easily download the code, adapt it,
use it at the customer's site and post a request to include the fix or feature
in a future version. Meanwhile has anybody thought about that little
interim build's version number? Back to my product: I can't just
increase the build number for the patch as it will conflict with the builds of the next
version. We redefined the version scheme of our assemblies to be
Major.Minor.Patch.Build. How does this solve our
build number collision problem? It doesn't. Instead, when making a
Patch, we increase the patch number and the build number, but the buildnumber still collides
with the build number of the next version. But at least we can make
out the difference between a Patch on an earlier version and the build of a newer version,
by means of the Patch number. Why didn't we go for the minor number instead
of the patch number and versioning scheme alteration? Because the next version maybe a minor
one.