I'll admit up front that I'm still learning good methods of deployment and that I don't have a size 12 brain to accomplish the following task. Now with that being said...
We have around 8 exe's that exist on a network drive that reference a dll that is in the same share/folder. We'd like to have a common network share in a different location that would contain this dll and any future dll's that we create so we'd have only one place to make changes (presuming the apps do not need to be recompiled). I've not found a satisfactory answer for why a dll should not be shared on a network so I'm wondering what the best practice would be for doing this. If this is something that is acceptable and routinely done then what steps are necessary to accomplish this? Thanks in advance for any help you can give.
If this shared DLL has any chance of being updated during a future release, what you have now, a local copy stored against each application, is far better.
You say your stated objective is to be able to make one change to the DLL and have all apps update. I've heard the positive side of this case made before.
"We get to roll out improvements to all our apps"
Which, seen from a half-empty glass is :-
"We get to introduce common bugs to all our apps".
Even at eight projects, imagine what your launches will be like.
"Er, hello QA. Can you test this one new app? (plus the seven others that we've done nothing to but might be broken as a result)".
Libraries should only be shared if they are mature and unlikely to change. Sorry to be so up-front about it, but I've faced a zealot who absolutely believed as you do. It was only when our bottom-line (predictably) nose-dived that my concerns were listened to. Dragons ahead. Be warned!
Related
I'm using VB.net so keep that in mind.
I'm trying to create a program that is highly edible. Users will be able to change multiple things by just replacing the existing dlls. Kind of like a modding ability.
The new DLL shouldn't have to recreate every function though, it should only include the ones that it changes and then hook to the old dll for anything that it doesn't have. Is there a way to dynamically do this? Reference another dll (like a proxy) through yourself for anything that doesn't exist in its self?
Sorry if that is confusing. If it still confuses people, I'll draw a picture later =)
I'm Sorry, but it must be done this way. I have already set up everything in the manor and told clients (they have already started developing).
Sounds like you want to write a plugin architecture into your application, why re-invent the wheel, take a look at the Managed Extensibility Framework
Where can I find the code for creating an online rebol console like the one here ?
http://tryrebol.esperconsultancy.nl/
Update: for the sandbox system on the server, can't Rebol manage it itself with some security wrapper and its security options ?
As for console itself, I don't know Ruby so I don't want to use TryRuby and why would I need it ? Can't I mimic Rebol console itself by "remoting" it somehow ? Why RT or Esper Consultancy can't make an opensource version ? There's no value in keeping it closed source. Rebol needs to prove it's more open than in the past.
In my opinion, you should aim higher with something like the already open-sourced Try Ruby. You'd type in expressions and it would guide you. Their showcase site is at tryruby.org and is fairly slick.
I modified TryRuby to work with Rebol and it wound up looking like this:
But I'm not going to run it on my server because I didn't want to belabor the necessary sandboxing/etc. or protections against someone running an infinite loop. I can give you what I've got so far if you want it.
I started a tutorial script here that no one seemed interested in helping me with, so I wandered off to other tasks:
http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Interactive_tutorial_script
I'm not sure what exactly you want. You mention you want a remote REBOL shell instead of a tutoring setup, but that's what the Try REBOL site is. There are several reasons it's not open source:
It's in heavy development. I'm currently changing the code regularly.
So it's not in a release state. Preparing it for release, documenting and publishing it would take a lot of extra work, as with most projects.
It's written in my CMS that's also in heavy development. Even if the Try REBOL site were open source, it wouldn't run. The CMS is not planned to be open sourced soon.
It's not meant as a generic REBOL remoting tool, but as a one-off demo site. If that site is running, what's the use of more of them?
As others have answered, there are many generic solutions for remoting that you could use. Also, most parts of the Try REBOL site are readily available as open source:
Syllable Server, produced and published by us.
The Cheyenne web server.
The HTML source of the web client can be viewed, including my simple JavaScript command service bus.
Syllable Server is an essential part of the site, as the sandboxing is not done with REBOL facilities (except some extra limits in the R3 backend), but with standard Linux facilities.
A truly air tight (do I mean silica tight?) sandbox is close to impossible with R2.
R3 (still in alpha) is looking a lot more promising. The deep technical discussions in flight right now (see Cure code and AltME/REBOL3 Proposals regarding unwinds and protect and even occasionally mentioning sandboxes should lead to an excellent sandbox capability.
Right now, the big advance R3 has that makes Kaj's tryREBOL possible is R3's secure policy settings which make it possible (with some careful wrapper code) to construct an alpha/demo sandbox.
To answer your precise question("where can I find code...", you could try asking Kaj for his :)
I'm new to StackOverflow. I'm not sure if this is going to end up as a reply to your comment, or as a new answer.
The somewhat common idea that any project can be open sourced and contributed to by others is a naive view. In the case of my Try REBOL site, it makes no sense. It's not just in heavy development; it's written in a CMS that's also in heavy development. Basically noone could contribute to it at this point, because I'm the only one who knows my CMS. Or in any case its newest features, which I develop by developing Try REBOL, and other example sites. So developing Try REBOL means developing the CMS at the same time, and by definition, I'm the only one who can do that.
More generally, my projects are bleeding edge, innovative technology with a strong vision. The vision is mine, and to teach it to others, I have to build it to show how I intended it to work. So there's a catch 22: to enable others to contribute, I have to finish my projects first, because people typically don't understand them until I show them how they work.
There certainly are other projects where mass contribution makes more sense. Still, only the top projects get the contributors. We found that out the hard way. We created Syllable Desktop and Syllable Server with surrounding infrastructure for contributions. These are fairly classic, well understood operating systems that many people could work on in parallel. However, despite years of begging, we get very few contributions.
So, if you feel a burning need to contribute to our projects, please pick one of the many tasks in Syllable to execute. :-)
I need to build a fairly simple app but it needs to work on both PC and Mac.
It also needs to be redistributable on a disc or usb drive as a standalone desktop app.
Initially I thought AIR would be perfect for this (it ticks all the API requirements), but the difficulty is making it distributable, as the app would require the AIR runtime to be installed to run.
I came across Shu Player as an option as it seems to be able to package the AIR runtime with the app and do a (silent?) install.
However this seems to break the T&C from Adobe (as outlined here) so I'm not sure about the legality.
Another option could be Zinc but I haven't tested it so I'm not sure how well it'll fit the bill.
What would you recommend or suggest I check out?
Any suggestion much appreciated
EDIT:
There's a few more discussions on mono usage (though no real conclusion):
Here and Here
EDIT2:
Titanium could also fit the bill maybe, will check it out.
Any more comments from anyone?
EDIT3 (one year on): It's actually been almost a year since I posted that question but it seems some people still come across it every now and then, and even contribute an answer, even a year later.
Thought I'd update the question a bit. I did not get around to try the tcl/tk option at the end, time constraint and the uncertainty of the compatibility to different os versions led me to discard that as an option.
I did try Titanium for a bit but though the first impressions were ok, they really are pushing the mobile platform more than anything, and imho, the desktop implementation suffers a bit from that lack of attention. There are also some report of problems with some visual studio runtime on some OSs (can't remember the details now though).. So discarded that too.
I ended up going with XULRunner. The two major appeals were:
Firefox seems to work out of the box on most OS version, so I took it as good faith that a XULRunner app would likely be compatible with most system. Saved me a lot of testing and it turned out that it did run really well on all platforms, there hasn't been a single report of not being able to start the app
It's Javascript baby! Language learning curve was minimal. The main thing to work out is what the additional xpcom interfaces are and how to query them.
On the down side:
I thought troubleshooting errors was a sometimes difficult task, the venkman debugger is kinda clunky, ended up using the console more than anything.
The sqlite interface is a great asset for a desktop app but I often struggled to find relevant error infos when something didn't work - maybe i was doing it wrong.
It took a little while to work out how to package the app as a standalone app for both PC and Mac. The final approach was to have a "shell" mac app and a shell pc app and a couple of "compile" script that would copy the shells and add the custom source code onto it in the correct location.
One last potential issue for some, due to the nature of xulrunner apps, your source code will be deployed with the app, you can use obfuscation if you want but that's something to keep in mind if you want to protect your intellectual property
All in all, great platform for a cross-platform app. I'd highly recommend it.
Tcl/Tk has one of the best packaging solutions out there. You can easily wrap a cross-platform application (implemented in a fully working virtual filesystem) with a platform-specific binary to get a single file executable for just about any modern desktop system. Search google for the terms starkit, starpack and tclkit. Such wrapped binaries are tiny in comparison to many executables these days.
Many deride Tk as being "old" or "immature" but it's one of the oldest, most stable toolkits out there. It uses native widgets when such widgets exist.
One significant drawback of Tcl/Tk, however, is that it lacks any sort of printing support. If your application needs to print you'll have to be a bit creative. There are platform-specific solutions, and the ability to generate postscript documents, and libraries to create pdfs, but it takes a little extra effort.
Java is probably your best bet, although not all Windows PCs will necessarily have Java (most should). JavaFX is new enough you can't count on it - you'll probably find a lot of machines running Java 1.5 or (shudder) 1.4. I believe recent Mac OS still ships with 1.5 (latest version may have changed to 1.6).
Consider JavaFX
It would run everywhere with a modern JRE ..!
AIR could be an option, but only if you don't mind distributing two different files (the offline runtime installer and your app), and expecting the user to run one and then the other. You do have to submit an online form at Adobe's site saying you agree to distribute the offline installer as-is, rather than digging out individual DLLs or whatever, before they give you the installer.
Unfortunately there's currently no way to get both an AIR app and the runtime to install from one file though. I'm not sure what the deal with Shu is, or whether it's doing anything that isn't kosher.
i would recommended zink. it has all the functionalities you require for desktop. however, the las time i used it it was a bit glitchy.
i was hung up by trying to write a 6M file to the disk. thought it trough and changed the code to write 512K chunks at a time (3min work, fast).
probably it still has some little annoying glitches like making you think on root lvl but the ease of use and the features are just way too sweet to ignore.
We have a new build machine to start using for our programming team. We are still trying to figure out how we want to organize everything to get the best configuration for building EXEs and DLLs.
We are using VB6 and VB.Net 2005, and VSS2005.
We were thinking of making working folders set for each project, release and support tickets. Does anyone have experience with a similar set up? What were your likes/dislikes? Any recommendations (New VSS IDs, folder configuration, setting working folder, updating/building files)?
be agile - just grow it and and don't be afraid to change as you go a long. Pick something very simple to start with and see how it goes.
Here is my simple environment. Decide what you want to do on a desktop to implement the joel test question #2. This in my experience is pivotal. Once you can do the complete build and test on a desktop with one (or a couple of) clicks then you have the basis for an automated build machine.
The trick is get this going quickly using what ever tools are at hand quickly - e.g. VSS and Cruise control, MSBuild etc, and tune. You should be able to get a pretty good (80/20 rule) in a few days of iterative effort.
Edit: Just to answer comment.
Yes you are correct is is be very beneficial to learn from other people experiences (not just their practises). However having set up build environments in may different companies I can say the best thing is once you start with some else's complexity you end up fighting other peoples requirements and assumptions. Yes I've now got experience and I can use that as a metric to start easily.
Watch out for issues when building VB6 components that depend on each other - see discussion in this question.
I've seen many people saying XRCed very strong "if you have learned how to use it". Unfortuntately, there're few documents about it, and many of the links on SF.net home page is 404 now.
The best I can found is XRCed Tutorial, however it is too primitive - so, does anyone have some idea for where can I find better documents about it?
Just a suggestion; have you tried wxFormBuilder? XRCed seems a little outdated (hasn't been updated for a while), and it does the same thing as wxFB. I've been using wxFB for a while in several projects and it's a life saver.
Alongside the already mentioned wxFormBuilder, I'm going to throw in wxGlade, as well. While I prefer wxFormbuilders GUI, I found it to be lacking in the available widgets. So I moved to wxGlade based on the amount of widgets it offers.
Both can create XRC files (and some other codes like C++ and python) and I think both are actively maintained. I think XRCed hasn't been updated since 2007.
For ease of use, I would go with wxFormBuilder. If you want to use various different widgets, for the moment, go with wxGlade. I don't know if wxFormbuilder is planning on incorporating ToggleButtons and the like in their future releases. It isn't in the one that I am using...