Products

Solutions

Resources

Partners

Community

Blog

About

QA

Ideas Test

New Community Website

Ordinarily, you'd be at the right spot, but we've recently launched a brand new community website... For the community, by the community.

Yay... Take Me to the Community!

Welcome to the DNN Community Forums, your preferred source of online community support for all things related to DNN.
In order to participate you must be a registered DNNizen

HomeHomeArchived Discus...Archived Discus...Developing Under Previous Versions of .NETDeveloping Under Previous Versions of .NETASP.Net 2.0ASP.Net 2.0Packaging DNN ModulesPackaging DNN Modules
Previous
 
Next
New Post
5/29/2008 11:29 AM
 

seems like you might have hit the ideal solution that I've been looking for r_honey
I've been trying to decide which route I prefer but seem unable to do so as the advantages of WAP when it comes to packaging are fairly large, though I find setting up a project in WSP so quick and easy.

I'm goin to try the referencing route and see what happens.

 

John

 


John Nicholson
 
New Post
5/29/2008 11:53 AM
 

Be sure to inform the rest of the community here about your results. I have also started on with my WAP project & would update the rest as soon as I get something through!!!

 
New Post
5/29/2008 12:58 PM
 

Ok, the initial results of my suggested approach for Module Development (start with WSP & deploy with WAP) are out. They are both good as well as sad news.

There are several important points worth noting:

1) There is no need to attach to asp worker process while working in WAP project. Setting a breakpoint would take you there straight-away.

2) Although VS does not lock neither code-behinds, not other class files. But you can not use a modify and continue approach for any of them (you cannot use this approach for class files even in WSP). Tis is because the WAP project compiles & it sdll gets copied into the site's bin folder. So, when you make a change when the site is running, VS complains that the source file has changed, and ignores the changes. You need to stop the run, recompile & rerun for any chnage (even in code-behinds) to take effect, unlike WSP appraoch where code-behinds can be changed dynamically, making it definitely a better choice for developemnt.

3) My suggested approach to refernece an existing code file created using WSP while migrating to WAP, both works as well as fails. It works as you do not need to copy the file, you can directly tell VS where to pick up the code from. It fails because VS copies that file in the WAP project folder

Depending upon your outlook, that might be good as well as bad. For me, that is bad, coz there are effectively 2 code-bases. If after migrating to WAP, I make some change to code in WAP (say a bug-fix), the WSP file becomes outdated. And if make the fix in WSP, the WAP becomes outdated.

The solution is easy. Just synchronise them, when you update one. But doing it manualy, can get quite troublesome very soon. Need to find a VS way to do it automatically. Haven't tried yet, but believe that I can set a post-build action for both WSP & WAP project, that updates the corresponding files in the other project after a successful build, of one project, effectively synchronising them automatically.

4) There is a .designer.vb file created for each of your module's controls when you create a WAP project. It contains old ASP 1.1 style declarations. And this file is needed with proper control declarations for the WAP project to run.

Now, here's the only major problem while converting a WSP project to WAP. You will need to manually create this file for all your controls, containing all control declarations. This again is not difficult but tiresome. It should NOT be very difficult to create a tool that analyzes an ascx file & creates .designer.vb file for it (The tool would basically need to generate control declarations for each control with an ID tag. The complexity for the control would come from generating Fully Qualified Class names while generating

Dim a as ClassName

This would depend on Imports, Register statement at the top of the ascx file as well as namespaces & assemblies imported in web.config. Still, I believe this tool can & should be developed very quickly.

SO, now I look to comments from other community members. I believe DNN team should seriously consider developing this tool, as this would remove the only practical restriction for converting a WSP project to WAP project, which would provide developers the best of both worlds, development-time productivity (the mantra of .NET) and deployment time flexibility.

 
New Post
5/30/2008 1:11 AM
 

You need to maintain a seperate copy of the files - one for WAP and one for WSP if I recall.
Least thats the way I always do it.

Only creating the WAP version folder when the module is ready to go live.

AS also mentioned - you also need to treat the fils in the APP_CODE folder differently.

They cant exist in the APP_CODE folder if you are trying to install or build a WAP version in the same application.

 
New Post
5/30/2008 1:39 AM
 

The major problem in converting to WAP has boiled down to this: Create a .designer.vb file for each .ascx file.

Do you know of any automated tool to do that???

 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeArchived Discus...Archived Discus...Developing Under Previous Versions of .NETDeveloping Under Previous Versions of .NETASP.Net 2.0ASP.Net 2.0Packaging DNN ModulesPackaging DNN Modules


These Forums are dedicated to discussion of DNN Platform and Evoq Solutions.

For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, please observe the following posting guidelines:

  1. No Advertising. This includes promotion of commercial and non-commercial products or services which are not directly related to DNN.
  2. No vendor trolling / poaching. If someone posts about a vendor issue, allow the vendor or other customers to respond. Any post that looks like trolling / poaching will be removed.
  3. Discussion or promotion of DNN Platform product releases under a different brand name are strictly prohibited.
  4. No Flaming or Trolling.
  5. No Profanity, Racism, or Prejudice.
  6. Site Moderators have the final word on approving / removing a thread or post or comment.
  7. English language posting only, please.
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out