Agreed :) My observation thus far is that most (if not all) of these package manager projects are going to create package descriptors for NH without our needing to lift a finger (at least initially). It would be hard for any package manager attempting to deliver OSS for .NET to claim ubiquity without their having a package descriptor for NH. At least for the time being NH is in the position of being courted by the package management projects rather than the other way around :)
After the landscape settles down a bit and successes and failures emerge from the ashes its probably worth investing the time in trying to maintain 'official package descriptors' for the one or more of these that manage to gain traction in the broader community...unless we find that existing package descriptors are in some way incorrect, defective, resulting in a poor experience for adopters, etc. But for the mean time, the package descriptor formats are in heavy flux, early beta, and other slippery states where trying to chase them all at this point is probably a lot of work with low (relative) ROI. Steve Bohlen [email protected] http://blog.unhandled-exceptions.com http://twitter.com/sbohlen On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Diego Mijelshon <[email protected]>wrote: > And horn, and gems, and... > > Yeah, "fractured" is putting it mildly... > > In any case, the best would be to support all the popular ones... only I > have no idea which one is more popular. > In most cases, though, I believe the package managers' maintainers can help > with most of the work. > > Diego > > > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 15:44, Stephen Bohlen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Also don't forget Openwrap as well (re: package managers). >> >> This landscape is significantly fractured right now and from my >> observations many of these projects are quite dissimilar in re: the problems >> they are trying to solve and their approach to solving them once you start >> to dig beneath the surface. I suspect that near-term the term 'package >> manager' will prove too broad to (properly) describe them all :) >> >> Steve Bohlen >> [email protected] >> http://blog.unhandled-exceptions.com >> http://twitter.com/sbohlen >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Rory Plaire <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> In regards using a package system in Windows: >>> >>> There appear to be 2 choices: CoApp and NuPack. CoApp appears to be a >>> proper package management system for use platform-wide, and NuPack appears >>> to be targeted towards developers finding and getting dependencies. >>> >>> I'd be more inclined to make a choice towards a system which will allow >>> NH to be installed system-wide and then available for use by all .Net apps. >>> >>> -r >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Valeriu Caraulean >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> I agree with idea of NHibernate "package", but only along with a >>>> traditional "NHibernate only" one. >>>> >>>> What do you think about NuPack package management? >>>> Will it be practical to have a package with NH, NH Contrib, >>>> Fluent/codeconform and what else people uses the most? >>>> >>>> >> >
