Hi I love CoApp, but right now they are definitely focused on getting LAMP apps running on Linux. They want to release next spring, and only then they'll start looking into installing .NET apps. Also, while building, installing and updating libraries is a big-time goal for them, it's more in the context of application prerequisites, not installing libs on a dev machine.
Don't get me wrong, I love the vision of CoApp, but it's not there yet and it really serves a different purpose. (Garret said they are looking at integrating NuPack code in CoApp. We'll see.) You'll eventually want NH packages to be available so that NH-based applications can install with CoApp. If you also want to support build from source and updating, there's probably a lot of work to do for both the CoApp project and the packager. NuPack will come with VS. It solves a simple problem: it just installs binaries and configures your VS project. So it might look less ambitious than horn & co, but ambition comes at a price: that stuff just doesn't work. With NuPack, building is the packager's problem. (However, I'd like to know what NuPack does when, say, two libraries come with different versions of the same dependency, such as Castle...) CoApp is really fascinating, while NuPack looks like a marketing tool (gallery) + automation of a few simple steps. Still, if you want my advice: * Make official packages for NuPack, because it is easy and will have impact. * Let others like OpenWrap handle NH themselves. (OpenWrap announced it will support NuPack format, btw) * Just wait and see where CoApp goes. Hope this helps, Stefan From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rory Plaire Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 1:17 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [nhibernate-development] Planning NH next Ayende - It's not necessarily a bad idea. Linux distros have been doing this for over a decade. Upgrade issues are handled by the package management system. Windows and .Net (via Fusion) even has side-by-side installs, and it appears that CoApp is trying to make a package management system which manages upgrades both along the same lines as the existing world of package management as well as using side-by-side versioning. Honestly, I'd love a package management system which allows me to pull in whatever version of whatever dependencies I need and keeps them separate, as long as I can delegate version binding to my tools/platform. It looks to me that CoApp is trying to do this. -r On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Rory, That is a VERY bad idea. I am using some app with NH 2.0 and some app with NH 3.1 Putting it in the GAC means that I have to install the app in the destination server. Better to use XCOPY model On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Rory Plaire <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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?
