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 2.0Problems upgrading my module from dnn3.x to dnn4.xProblems upgrading my module from dnn3.x to dnn4.x
Previous
 
Next
New Post
2/3/2007 12:59 PM
 

Hmm... I wouldn't agree that you need to use DNN source to work with WAP? When I advise it, it's only because that gives you additional debugging help (having the source code helps you traverse your module into the DNN framework, and thus debug certain problematic scenarios easier)... You can also work without the source, and only deploy your modules to the central DNN installation for debugging and testing (my tutorial actually does that, it only uses the start kit and the source on start... but that can be avoided easily)

As for the beginners... I agree that not having to write your own data provider projects is a nice touch (actually when you've mentioned the idea some time ago on the asp.net forums it sounded really nice to me), not having to use IIS is also a nice touch... but for me things like that are of short term... simply because you start as a beginner (I did for DNN a few years ago on DNN 1.x and it was a pain to start developing.... although even then I was an experienced asp.net developer), and at that time things you mentioned are GREAT, but soon after you raise above the beginner level, those things become obsolete because you start thinking about smarter ways to write OO code, smarter ways to test the code, etc... then you come to O/R mappers, REAL code generation, real OO code practices, services, DDD design, etc... as well as wanting to have a FAST development enviroment that doesn't burden you with projects you don't need....

On the other hand, I agree that if you want to build a small solution (e.g. Guestbook) the practices you advise are quite enough, quite good, VERY easy to follow, and especially EASY to start with... that's why I am glad that there is a person like you who helps people get to a higher ground and start developing modules.


Cheers!


Thanks,
Vladan Strigo
NETMedia

My website: Vladan.Strigo.NET

Vladan.Strigo.NET: Projects
* Advanced VS2005 development approach - BlankModule
* DNN & Microsoft Ajax best practices guidance

Vladan.Strigo.NET: Resources
* Comprehensive list of DNN 4 Module development resources

 
New Post
2/3/2007 1:11 PM
 
Vladan Strigo wrote

On the other hand, I agree that if you want to build a small solution (e.g. Guestbook) the practices you advise are quite enough,

FotoVision 4 is not a small application and was built using Visual Web Developer Express using the methods I reccomend for beginners.



Michael Washington
http://ADefWebserver.com
www.ADefHelpDesk.com
A Free Open Source DotNetNuke Help Desk Module
 
New Post
2/3/2007 2:35 PM
 

AdefWebserver wrote
 Vladan Strigo wrote

On the other hand, I agree that if you want to build a small solution (e.g. Guestbook) the practices you advise are quite enough,

 

 

FotoVision 4 is not a small application and was built using Visual Web Developer Express using the methods I reccomend for beginners.

My opinions on what is easy or not is based on my experience of helping hundreds of people a year. Some of my tutorials have been used by more than 10,000 people. I have a good idea where people get stuck.

I would be tempted to continue this discussion here :) But I won't... I don't agree with you, and my professional experience leading teams of developers on bigger projects says differently.

However, please don't confuse my words as saying that it's not possible... sure it is, only as the project grows some things become less feasable.

If you want to continue this discussion off the forums, contact me by email.... vladan [at] strigo [dot] net

 


Thanks,
Vladan Strigo
NETMedia

My website: Vladan.Strigo.NET

Vladan.Strigo.NET: Projects
* Advanced VS2005 development approach - BlankModule
* DNN & Microsoft Ajax best practices guidance

Vladan.Strigo.NET: Resources
* Comprehensive list of DNN 4 Module development resources

 
New Post
2/3/2007 2:56 PM
 
Vladan Strigo wrote

However, please don't confuse my words as saying that it's not possible... sure it is, only as the project grows some things become less feasable.

The dynamic compilation model is very useful to a large number of developers. To make statements that it is only suitable for small simple modules the size of Guestbook is not beneficial to the community when it is an inaccurate statement.

I offer FotoVision as an example to prove my point. When I added the ability to store pictures in the database I practically doubled the size of the codebase (because I used the DAL not the DAL+). At no time did I reach a point where the size made anything "less feasible". I could continue to add code and it would continue to work.

  • At what point should I have switched to the WAP model?
  • Would the module have worked faster or better?
  • Was there anything I could not do with the module?


Michael Washington
http://ADefWebserver.com
www.ADefHelpDesk.com
A Free Open Source DotNetNuke Help Desk Module
 
New Post
2/3/2007 3:47 PM
 
AdefWebserver wrote
 Vladan Strigo wrote

However, please don't confuse my words as saying that it's not possible... sure it is, only as the project grows some things become less feasable.

 

 

The dynamic compilation model is very useful to a large number of developers. To make statements that it is only suitable for small simple modules the size of Guestbook is not beneficial to the community when it is an inaccurate statement.

I offer FotoVision as an example to prove my point. When I added the ability to store pictures in the database I practically doubled the size of the codebase (because I used the DAL not the DAL+). At no time did I reach a point where the size made anything "less feasible". I could continue to add code and it would continue to work.

  • At what point should I have switched to the WAP model?
  • Would the module have worked faster or better?
  • Was there anything I could not do with the module?

Please don't turn my words into something they are not. I gave Guestbook only as an example, not as an exact measure of possibilities nor size.

Can you answer me this:

- How many developers have worked on FotoVision (not sequentally, but parallel)?
- How much man hours was spent on the complete project?
- Which methods of architecture did you use besides standard DNN ones?
- Which additional architectural solutions did you implement in the solution?
- Which methods for testing did you use (Unit tests, TDD...)?
- What was the avreage build time of your solution?

As for the example of 10000 developers using your tutorials, I even belive this is true, and am glad that there are that much beginners in DNN ranks... that ensures that the development community will continue to grow :)

 


Thanks,
Vladan Strigo
NETMedia

My website: Vladan.Strigo.NET

Vladan.Strigo.NET: Projects
* Advanced VS2005 development approach - BlankModule
* DNN & Microsoft Ajax best practices guidance

Vladan.Strigo.NET: Resources
* Comprehensive list of DNN 4 Module development resources

 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeArchived Discus...Archived Discus...Developing Under Previous Versions of .NETDeveloping Under Previous Versions of .NETASP.Net 2.0ASP.Net 2.0Problems upgrading my module from dnn3.x to dnn4.xProblems upgrading my module from dnn3.x to dnn4.x


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