Smart Client Software Factory April 2008 Alpha Available

Topics: CAB & Smart Client Software Factory
Coordinator
Apr 10, 2008 at 10:30 PM
Edited Apr 10, 2008 at 10:32 PM
Blaine and I have both blogged about the release we just posted here on the SCSF CodePlex site.

From Blaine's post:

The new features include:

  • The April 2008 release of the Smart Client Software Factory includes support for Visual Studio 2008. This release does not support Visual Studio 2005.
  • We fixed a few bugs that were identified by the community.
  • Requires Guidance Automation Extensions 1.4.
  • April 2008 Guidance Package can run side-by-side with the May 2007 Guidance Package.

Known Issues include:

  • If the SCSF source is installed on the default path, compiling Quickstarts.WPFIntegration.sln will fail with path too long error.
  • If the SCSF source is installed on the default path, compiling GuidancePackage.sln will fail with path too long error.
  • Unit tests of CompositeUI.WPF.Tests project (in CompositeUI-WPFExtensions.sln) will fail when executed under debug mode.

Warning

This is an Alpha. We did a minimal amount of testing ("It compiles and links." -- "Good enough. Ship it"), and the computer we installed it on still boots, still runs VS, and seems ok. Use at your own risk.

Download it from here: Smart Client Software Factory April 2008 Alpha

Apr 11, 2008 at 1:42 AM
Personally, I'd like you to wait until you can use EntLib 4.0 before you release this. There are some features there that I'd like to use (esp. with regards to logging). If your actual release uses 3.1, I'm sure I can hack it together to use 4.0, but it would make my life easier if you guys did the work! :)
Apr 11, 2008 at 4:16 AM


MichaelPuleio wrote:
Blaine and I have both blogged about the release we just posted here on the SCSF CodePlex site.

Warning

This is an Alpha. We did a minimal amount of testing ("It compiles and links." -- "Good enough. Ship it"), and the computer we installed it on still boots, still runs VS, and seems ok. Use at your own risk.

Download it from here: Smart Client Software Factory April 2008 Alpha


Installed and worked flawlessly in my Vista Ultimate / Visual Studio 2008 Team System development environment! Will be so nice to have all of my apps on one platform (VS2008).

Congrats to the team! Your hard work is deeply appreciated :)


Apr 11, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I for one vote better to wait for EntLib 4.0 released and ship with it because I think it would give people much more abilities in hands.
Apr 11, 2008 at 7:46 PM

BillKrat wrote:


MichaelPuleio wrote:
Blaine and I have both blogged about the release we just posted here on the SCSF CodePlex site.

Warning

This is an Alpha. We did a minimal amount of testing ("It compiles and links." -- "Good enough. Ship it"), and the computer we installed it on still boots, still runs VS, and seems ok. Use at your own risk.

Download it from here: Smart Client Software Factory April 2008 Alpha


Installed and worked flawlessly in my Vista Ultimate / Visual Studio 2008 Team System development environment! Will be so nice to have all of my apps on one platform (VS2008).

Congrats to the team! Your hard work is deeply appreciated :)

Installed here and also ready to roll. You guys rock!
Apr 11, 2008 at 9:37 PM
Can anyone give a (reasonably accurate, if possible) indication of when the final version will be released?

A tough question, but I'm in the middle of trying to make a decision of which version (May 2007 or April 2008) to go with on a new project.

Further:
  • We have an anticipated 3 month dev time, starting from next week
  • We're currently on VS2005 and I want to move everyone to VS2008, and I'm having real issue with getting things working in VS2005 (don't try to help me with this, I've given up)

I'm happy to start out with an Alpha, but I need to convince myself that a stable, release version will be ready before we finish with the build.

(FWIW, I just started looking at this thing, and I absolutely love it. I am impressed)

Thanks,
Brendan Green.
Coordinator
Apr 12, 2008 at 6:30 AM


bgreen wrote:
Can anyone give a (reasonably accurate, if possible) indication of when the final version will be released?


The best answers I can give are "Soon" and "When it is done".
The docs are pretty much done, we are currently playing whack-a-bug, there are not many open bugs left, and our test team is not finding new issues.
I could give you my guess at a date, but I would rather not, just in case a new issue comes up and makes me a liar. Especially considering that someone had blogged that we would ship in February, and we did not have a team spun up until after that time had past.

Michael Puleio - patterns & practices
Webhttp://msdn.microsoft.com/practices/
Bloghttp://blogs.msdn.com/mpuleio/.
Coordinator
Apr 12, 2008 at 6:54 AM


mschoneman wrote:
Personally, I'd like you to wait until you can use EntLib 4.0 before you release this. There are some features there that I'd like to use (esp. with regards to logging). If your actual release uses 3.1, I'm sure I can hack it together to use 4.0, but it would make my life easier if you guys did the work! :)


What features in EntLib 4.0 are must haves?
Would you abandon SCSF and/or CAB if it does not support EntLib4?

Before you respond, I'll share my thoughts on the upgrade. These are my thoughts, not anyone else's, not Microsoft's, not the team's,
  • If we upgrade to EntLib4.0, we have a big choice: re-write CAB to use Unity or not?
    • If we do decide to re-write CAB with Unity, what benefit do we provide to you (our customers) that we do not already provide? (New features, longer dev time)
    • Is that benefit worth the X months of time (my guess is three months for the re-write, but it is a guess) it would take us to do the work of the upgrade/re-write plus the new feature development work (another month or three)?
    • Is the community willing to wait that long?
    • Is there other, higher benefit work (like Prism, Acceptance Testing Guidance, or other things on the p&p backlog) that we should do instead? If not, what do we cut to do it?
    • Is it worth breaking backwards compatability for the new container and other new features? This might require serious changes with wide-spread ramifications?
  • If we do not re-write CAB and SCSF to use Prism:
    • There is a risk that EntLib4 and Prism will not co-exist well with the old DI container (small, but we have talked about it with Chris and Scott a bit).
    • There is also serious code bloat (2 completely different DI systems available, that do not interact with each other). This sounds like a very bad architecture to me.
    • Would all of the above result in better guidance than what we currently have?
    • Does the benefit to the customers (you all) out weigh the cost of the investment of $###,###.00, when we could spend that elsewhere?
  • Either way, what do we do when EntLib 4.42 (or whatever the next version is) ships with this precedent set?

I am not sure what we will do with EntLib 4.0 and CAB/SCSF. From all of the questions I am asking, you should be able to tell that we have not decided yet,

Michael Puleio - patterns & practices
Webhttp://msdn.microsoft.com/practices/
Bloghttp://blogs.msdn.com/mpuleio/
Apr 12, 2008 at 2:17 PM

bgreen wrote:
I'm happy to start out with an Alpha, but I need to convince myself that a stable, release version will be ready before we finish with the build.


Hi Brendan,

My understanding, from reading messages in this forum and blogs associated with SCSF, is that outside of fixing bugs (reported by the community) that SCSF hasn't really changed and that the goals were to get Guidance package support in VS2008 working and the docs upgraded.

We have had great success with May 2007 (measured by the fact that the team was new to C# and SCSF and completed the project on schedule) and now with the bugs fixed, i.e., View disposal, I suspect April 2008 is far more "predictable"; I'd stay stable but SCSF was already stable - just unpredictable because a few things didn't work as you expected.

I've made a VS2008 copy of our solution (I found VS2005/2008 can share projects) and as long as the recipes are functional I can put VS2005 behind us. I'm grateful (to the SCSF team) to be working out of a single development environment - particularly since we've moved on to our next project which is utilizing WCSF on 2008.

Apr 14, 2008 at 8:50 PM
Thanks all for the comments.

I'v taken all the comments on board to make the decision.

Cheers,
Brendan.
Apr 20, 2008 at 1:31 AM


MichaelPuleio wrote:

What features in EntLib 4.0 are must haves?
Would you abandon SCSF and/or CAB if it does not support EntLib4?



As I mentioned most of the thing I'd like are related to logging, and all of the ones that I'd consider must haves are:
- The filter property (hopefully it will now let me use Logger.ShouldLog to check if a message will actually be written)
- Log filename support for environment variable (I've got something that works now but it's a big kludge)
- RollInterval of Midnight

No I wouldn't abandon it. It just would prevent my from moving other stuff to EntLib4. I only want to have one version of EntLib that we use though out our system. Some of our stuff uses SCSF and CAB, some does not, but as we are jumping between different parts I don't want to have to deal with minor differences and shipping mutliple versions.

-Michael O. Schoneman