tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.comments2023-10-11T02:28:42.588-05:00Technical DifficultiesAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00751154354014174645noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-74098359032513561242018-09-13T04:24:33.988-05:002018-09-13T04:24:33.988-05:00Thanks a lot for your energy to have had these thi...Thanks a lot for your energy to have had these things together on this site. Robin and that i very much liked your knowledge through the articles about certain things. I know that you have several demands on your program so the fact that you actually took just as much time just like you did to guide people just like us by means of this article is definitely highly liked. <a href="https://amrepinspect.com/technical-compliance/" rel="nofollow">Technical Compliance team</a><br />Timy Tonshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12831451615322425979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-66345223772270332922014-09-18T12:39:26.633-05:002014-09-18T12:39:26.633-05:00With 3.0+, look at this sample:
https://github.co...With 3.0+, look at this sample:<br /><br />https://github.com/structuremap/structuremap/blob/master/src/StructureMap.Testing/Acceptance/interception_acceptance_tests.cs#L221-L238Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14331574527763997975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-9960391227803019442014-06-25T04:45:02.548-05:002014-06-25T04:45:02.548-05:00This is such an informative article on SCRUMand ve...This is such an informative article on <a href="http://www.scrumstudy.com/" rel="nofollow">SCRUM</a>and very clearly written. Every single thought and idea is direct to the point. Perfectly laid out. Thank you for taking your time sharing this to you readers. - Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04989156717045953127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-28992272746620834452013-10-02T13:19:36.084-05:002013-10-02T13:19:36.084-05:00Hey thanks for your post, I just spent half an hou...Hey thanks for your post, I just spent half an hour having the exact problem. Solved! ;-)andyphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03001994183888964750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-91614866297455273642013-07-17T03:59:27.085-05:002013-07-17T03:59:27.085-05:00I've recently started to use MSBuild (manually...I've recently started to use MSBuild (manually) on a project and I'm impressed. I've accomplished some really great things and I haven't had to touch any custom configuration. I used visual studio to set up a custom build configuration and also to setup an msdeploy profile for that configuration. The result is one call to msbuild on my solution with the right parameters and my entire solution is built, a web deploy package is created and deployed to my environment that I setup in visual studio. Anyway, great blog.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01328753280859635286noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-78066844055264128572013-03-06T22:17:30.634-06:002013-03-06T22:17:30.634-06:00Take a look at my open-source routing framework fo...Take a look at my open-source routing framework for .NET: JuniorRoute.<br /><br />http://projects.nathanalden.com/JuniorRoute<br /><br />I believe JuniorRoute is superior to all other .NET MVC frameworks in several key areas. I encourage those of you interested in alternatives to ASP.NET MVC's heavyweight design to take a look at JuniorRoute. I actively maintain it and it has great documentation and even Visual Studio project templates.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-52432546538207572422012-12-09T00:09:52.061-06:002012-12-09T00:09:52.061-06:00Some comments on Razor w/ VS2012
http://coreykayl...Some comments on Razor w/ VS2012<br /><br />http://coreykaylor.com/blog/2012/12/08/getting-started-with-fubumvc-razor-on-vs-2012/Corey Kaylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01648605993865271449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-87558525610301988052012-12-04T10:55:54.097-06:002012-12-04T10:55:54.097-06:00This might possibly help as well. *I* haven't ...This might possibly help as well. *I* haven't tested yet. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10368545/get-razor-intellisense-in-library-projectCorey Kaylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01648605993865271449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-38427540097645270722012-12-04T10:49:26.999-06:002012-12-04T10:49:26.999-06:00I have not tried in 2012, but I will make a point ...I have not tried in 2012, but I will make a point to sometime this week. Look in the discussion group for "actionless views" if that's what you're looking for. this.Partial(model) essentially does a controller / behavior chain for model (input model). An actionless view makes controller / chain unnecessary.Corey Kaylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01648605993865271449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-14314823276038367942012-12-04T10:40:43.117-06:002012-12-04T10:40:43.117-06:00Thanks for the comment! After hearing Jeremy say t...Thanks for the comment! After hearing Jeremy say that everyone pretty much uses Spark, I'm going to give that a whirl next.<br /><br />That being said - have you tested the tooling in VS2012 with the latest binaries? I followed the steps in the docs, and running WinMerge on my web.config and the one in the docs, the only differences are WebPages.Razor is now 2.0, and Core, Web.Mvc, etc are 4.0. I've added references to Web.WebPages and Web.Mvc in my project as well. I've posted my web.config here: https://gist.github.com/590c869de79a32b88071 . The project itself is https://github.com/robertsimmons/collect , but I can understand if you don't want to go through the work. Especially since I'm going to try Spark anyways.<br /><br />I really like behaviors, and figured there was more to it than what I saw at the get-go. As I said, this was just experiences so far, not meant to be a "I am now a FubuMVC master!" post by any stretch of the imagination.<br /><br />Using this.Partial(model) gave me a "no behavior" error, so I'll continue to dig on that just for curiosity. Need to learn more about behaviors anyways, right? :)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00751154354014174645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-78291997503170639112012-12-04T10:03:58.791-06:002012-12-04T10:03:58.791-06:00Good feedback. Seeing that I am the author of Fubu...Good feedback. Seeing that I am the author of FubuMVC's Razor support and do not use it myself probably speaks to why there is friction. However, some of what you said just isn't accurate. The tooling support works fine, so long as you "play ball" with the assumptions that were made on the tooling side. Referencing unneeded assemblies, placing configuration in the web.config that aren't needed. As for partials this.Partial(model) would get you what you're looking for. Unfortunately the other Include methods are an ugly remnant from RazorEngine's implementation and tend to confuse things. I *may* support them due to the mentioned confusion, but I didn't feel it was the "fubu way" of doing things.<br /><br />On a separate note, I would look at behaviors a bit more or post questions to the discussion group. There's a lot of power here and the comparison to Handlers makes me think you should give it a second look.<br /><br />Thanks for the constructive criticism. We'll do our best to remove the friction, and heck if we don't get to it fast enough we're very willing to take contributions from the community. ;)Corey Kaylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01648605993865271449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-65995473211537790892012-01-08T19:50:59.853-06:002012-01-08T19:50:59.853-06:00Agree. Perhaps the people you're writing about...Agree. Perhaps the people you're writing about seem to "define" culture of .NET b/c they're more visible and loud; if they weren't, they'd be quiet and there wouldn't be this blog post. And I am glad to know that I'm a real hero in your world not just b/c I bring you cookies at work, but also b/c I don't have a "look I'm cool" blog, don't try to show off my "omg look I figured this one thing out!" stuff, and in general don't give a crap about GITHub or points on StackOverflow, open-source contributions, or being "visible" in any other way. Maybe I'm old-school, but the only thing that matters to me is how much my contributions help pad the bottom line of my employer (without, of course, sacrificing my own career). Staying mostly current is definitely important b/c it's in general profitable, but at the same time, last time I checked, I was paid for the bottom line, not for putting the latest fads into my code, being "active" in "the community", or refactoring existing code until I feel it's cool enough (i.e., all mine).Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04847450991536311856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-51385357343652713392012-01-08T19:37:44.850-06:002012-01-08T19:37:44.850-06:00Principals? You mean, principles. Gosh, it's y...Principals? You mean, principles. Gosh, it's your first language, l2Englishn00b. Oh, and another way for a manager to know there are problems on the team is if Rob is a part of it. Just a rule of thumb.Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04847450991536311856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-49067580530722247222012-01-06T14:08:10.187-06:002012-01-06T14:08:10.187-06:00Bah. My blog sucks, and only shows the time at the...Bah. My blog sucks, and only shows the time at the bottom of the post, not the whole date. I'm aware. I could fix it but...so lazy...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00751154354014174645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-14763832930218739012012-01-06T14:03:25.883-06:002012-01-06T14:03:25.883-06:00Who's this Matt guy? And how do you go back in...Who's this Matt guy? And how do you go back in time to make posts - coz I see one from 7:23pm and then a "newer" one is at 1:15pm? That's so cool!!Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04847450991536311856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-39925521224014106092011-12-26T22:37:03.463-06:002011-12-26T22:37:03.463-06:00I consider myself to be moderate-to-advanced in my...I consider myself to be moderate-to-advanced in my MSBuild knowledge. I've written build and deploy scripts for several apps with it. I've authored several custom tasks. To this day, I use it for deploying updates for one of the commercial apps I support. I don't think it's a bad tool, but I think it's uses are pretty limited simply because there are now better tools for the job. I think it's a good fit for simple declarative tasks like (surprise) building a project. For things that require logic though, I think MSBuild is actually a pretty poor choice compared to the other things that are out there. Can it do pretty much anything you'd ever want? Sure, but you can make that argument with COBOL, C, C++, etc. <br /><br />For me, the big disadvantage of MSBuild is how verbose and complex it is for even simple tasks. Most of that is due to the declarative and verbose nature of XML. There's a lot to be said for terseness. What might take 4 or 5 lines of XML with MSBuild can be expressed with no loss in readability in 1 line of Powershell. In fact, the Powershell command is likely to be more readable just because it has less ceremony cluttering things up. Don't forget common, simple things like for loops don't map well to MSBuild, but they're trivial to express in an imperative language. <br /><br />So, I think that's one reason you don't see much love for MSBuild: it's not that people hate it, or that it's not cool, it's just that MSBuild wasn't never really built to handle some of the complicated things that people are now doing with their build and deploy processes. Other tools have cropped up that solve a lot of those problems more elegantly than MSBuild can.Matt Honeycutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08598387967691833582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-29674656677060654392011-12-24T14:17:27.433-06:002011-12-24T14:17:27.433-06:00Thanks for the post, I agree with a lot of your po...Thanks for the post, I agree with a lot of your points here. Also another thing that people don't typically factor into their thinking is tooling support. Since MSBuild is XML it is easy for tools like Visual Studio to easily integrate with it.Sayed Ibrahim Hashimihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15638050976039817335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-49124249459662022372011-12-14T08:06:19.245-06:002011-12-14T08:06:19.245-06:00Good post. The whole "code silo" thing ...Good post. The whole "code silo" thing is a huge problem IMO. As you noted, usually what happens when the developer that created the silo leaves is that the code has to be discarded and rewritten. I work/worked on a large information retrieval system, and unfortunately there are still large portions of the system that are unmaintainable to this day *because* they were created completely within a silo. <br /><br />Oh, another nice thing about peer reviews: when a bug is inevitably shipped, there will be at least two people to share the blame. :)Matt Honeycutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08598387967691833582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-36633546216002900852011-07-17T03:26:09.728-05:002011-07-17T03:26:09.728-05:00I agree with you quite a bit, here. I think there&...I agree with you quite a bit, here. I think there's a big drive for developers to use new technologies as soon as they can in production, before they've really "settled" down. Look at MVC, for instance: I have gotten to the point that I like MVC, but my development group settled on MVC2 with standard ASP.NET markup. Now, when I try to search the web for anything, I have to figure out if this code example is really MVC2 with ASP.NET markup, or if it's MVC3 with Razor, or worse, something earlier. <br /><br />The "business world" at large can't really work around the whims of what the blogosphere's technology du jour happens to be. We have to settle on something, work with it, make it stable, and learn its strengths and weaknesses. Then, once we do that, we have to make decisions on where to go from there. Decisions made from that position are more rational than "it's new and shiny"Alex Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15242128923621792795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-60589244197039806992010-07-24T03:27:39.856-05:002010-07-24T03:27:39.856-05:00Good info, didn't expect that there would be a...Good info, didn't expect that there would be a good order when dealing with deleting files and the app_offline.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-78473474269896972442010-04-12T09:01:59.828-05:002010-04-12T09:01:59.828-05:00Lawdy. I had that thought bouncing around in my he...Lawdy. I had that thought bouncing around in my head, and you put words to it. Cheers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-74394930024168413752010-01-25T07:51:08.443-06:002010-01-25T07:51:08.443-06:00For larger non-feature tasks, I like James approac...For larger non-feature tasks, I like James approach of spinning in to a "feature" that provides user value. For example, instead of "add unit tests", you could have "Reduce the number of production bugs (by adding unit tests)". <br /><br />For smaller tasks and bugs though, I don't think they necessarily need story points. If the number of bugs and debt-related tasks remains fairly consistent over time, and if you address them as close to the point of introduction as possible, your velocity should still provide a reliable estimate of how much new work you will accomplish.Matt Honeycutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08598387967691833582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-83819314571357669952010-01-23T16:52:17.575-06:002010-01-23T16:52:17.575-06:00Yeah Kolpack, I agree about paying technical debt ...Yeah Kolpack, I agree about paying technical debt having business value - and that's the whole idea. It's more difficult for non-technical people to understand, hence by trying to emphasize the real value by showing the decreased velocity towards new features. I guess a better subject line might be "that provide obvious business value". (I just realized - that's EXACTLY the phrase Matt used. I actually read Kolpack's reply first)<br /><br />Matt - so how do you plan and estimate the work on non-feature related stories? While there are some bugs, chores, etc that are straight forward and easy to estimate in hours, many times that's not the case (at least, not doing it with any accuracy, hence the creation of story points in the first place).Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09434038971620573603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-90713912386135750012010-01-23T15:10:15.759-06:002010-01-23T15:10:15.759-06:00While paying back technical debt isn't a user ...While paying back technical debt isn't a user feature, I would argue they aren't completely devoid of business value. It might be that stories can be created about repaying debt that are phrased in such a way that the business value is emphasized. Instead of "<i>Replace nasty un-DRY code in modules X Y and Z with reusable functionality</i>", "<i>As a stakeholder, I'd like to have a quick turnaround for future feature requests similar to modules X Y and Z</i>". <br /><br />I just did a google on this topic and this article appeared:<br /><br />http://blog.energizedwork.com/2005/11/repaying-technical-debt.html<br /><br />... which has some additional strategies - I noticed they all have an underlying assumption of carefully tracking the accrued technical debt. I can agree with that.James Kolpackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16334610295498910093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2430856949934117881.post-73547771092654946842010-01-23T14:52:44.320-06:002010-01-23T14:52:44.320-06:00We're using Pivotal Tracker at InRAD now, and ...We're using Pivotal Tracker at InRAD now, and actually won't allow you to assign points to anything that's not a "Feature" story. Bugs, chores, etc, can be created and assigned to an iteration, but they cannot be pointed and do not contribute to your velocity. I actually like this approach for the reasons you listed. To me, velocity tracks how quickly we're moving forward, and fixing bugs, paying technical debt, etc, is more "treading water" than moving forward, at least in terms of obvious business value.Matt Honeycutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08598387967691833582noreply@blogger.com