I'm looking for best practices and good ideas rather than a proper solution.
scenario: I work in a web agency and thus we are plenty of websites from several customers. They're built upon a cms we made, so websites are quite identical for the 90% of code. However, remaining 10% struggles me and my team as it involves not only the presentation layer but behavioral logics too (ex: a website1 requires simply user/pass registration while website2 needs more data, facebook connector, etc. But this is a very easy example).
Making ad hoc development for our customers is becoming painful as keep each version aligned is getting really hard for us
What I really dream to have is an extendible website that works by itself, but in which I can override a part. This behavior should sound like "look for the specific part, if it doesn't exists get the base one". The parts could be a method, a class, a page, a control, a static file.
example:
Suppose I want website2 to have an own login component, let's so imagine that we have a situation like:
/website_base
|_ login.aspx
/website1
/website2
|_ login.aspx
So, if I ask for www.website1.com I'll get /website_base/login.aspx, but if I ask for www.website2.com I'll get /website2/login.aspx
Any idea?
Thanks
PS: we work with asp.net 3.5 framework.
There are couple of ways to achieve this.
Approach 1:
1. Split the common functionality in modules and create a pluggable structure. (like DotNetNuke) Obviously this will be more time consuming initially but over the period of time it can make itself like a product.
Approach 2:
Firstly - I would create separate solution for each client for better maintainability. This will save me a lot of hassle while maintaining the source control and when one client comes back with issues and we have multiple releases for a single client.
Secondly - From my core solution, I will identify most commonly used artifacts for each layers and move them to a core assembly.
a. For example – In UI you can use themes to give different looks for each client. Have a default master page which comes with the core site structure. All client specific details like Logo, name, contact details etc… can be configured using some DB fields.
b. In Business Layer and Data Access Layer – core functionalities like Membership, Logging, CMS related Entities etc I would have as a dll
i. I will derive my client specific logic from these core classes.
Last but not the least – how you deploy your code and how your IIS VD structure looks like… I believe it will be totally dependent on how the solution is packaged.. I would create a deployment package for each client which will give them the ability to deploy it to any server wherever they want until you have specific issues about proprietary software hosting.
Look into ASP.NET MVC. It is much more extensible than Web Forms, can be integrated into your existing Web Forms application, and it is very easy to build reusable custom components like what you are describing.
Otherwise, I would suggest looking into WebParts and developing reusable custom server controls for the components that you need. This way you can encapsulate the complex functionality within a single UI control without having to write repetitive code. WebParts are also compatible with Personalization, which you can leverage to manage the variance between which sites use which controls.
I definitely recommend MVC as the way to go for building extensible .NET web applications, but learning a new technology always incurs a cost in the time it takes to understand the new paradigm. I hope this helps you.
I found a smart solution here: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/aspnet/ASP2UserControlLibrary.aspx
Check it out
I'm not sure I'm asking the right question here, but I'm looking to provide web based functionality from one ASP.NET application to another remote 'portal-like' application. Is it possible to simply give the portal a DLL? As an example, let's say the SaaS web app has a patient-entry form that I want to be able to use from the portal application. I would like the portal app to be able to set preferences (permissions, color, style, etc), make a function call, and have that capability presented within a certain div or something. Is there any .NET technologies that provide this kind of integration?
EDIT:
Here is a link to a quick diagram I made trying to describe the scenario: http://img.ly/ESG. I know there are other ways of doing this (eg JSON-P calls), but I need to give the portal developers something they can control on their end. Also, if anything changes they'll know I will send them a new version of the DLL which will indicate to them the new functionality.
I'll give you a shopping list of things to check out:
DotNetNuke:
http://www.dotnetnuke.com/
Workflow Foundation -
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa663328.aspx
Microsoft SAAS platform -
http://www.microsoft.com/serviceproviders/saas/default.mspx
Depending on exactly what you're looking for, you might also research "multitenancy".
To answer your original question, yes, you can do it with DLL's, but there are easier ways to do it.
We need to develop quite a powerful web application for an investment bank. The bank IT would like us to build it on top of the SharePoint platform, but we would prefer to do pure ASP.NET programming.
The web-app should have the following characteristics.
1) It will be a site for bank's clients that will allow them to view their stock portfolios, get miscellaneous reports with graphs and charts, etc.
2) The web-app will also allow clients to send orders to the bank to buy stocks and perform other financial operations.
3) The number of users will be approximately 3 000 000 (total) and 20 000 at any one time.
We have never made any SharePoint programming, but as far as I know, SharePoint is primarily designed to create intranet sites for colleagues to communicate with each other and work more efficiently, to maintain a document library, etc.
However, the bank IT told us that SharePoint has in fact lots of other features that will help us make the project more efficiently - for example, it seems that SharePoint has some built-in scalability and high availability technologies.
I heard saying that SharePoint development is very tedious, that the platform cannot be very easily customized, etc.
The question is: is it better to create our web-app on pure ASP.NET and deal with scalability and other issues ourselves, or base it on SharePoint - taking into account that the web-app we need to create is non-standard and complex?
Thank you,
Mikhail.
UPDATE
In the answers, someone suggested using ASP.NET MVC. My another question is: should we use "classic" ASP.NET or ASP.NET MVC for such project (if we leave out the SharePoint option)?
Do you need document management? Do you need version management? Do you need to create "sites"? Do you need audience filtering? Do you need ECM (fancy word for CMS), Do you need collaboration stuff on your site? If your answer is no then SharePoint is not for you.
You said "We have never made any SharePoint programming" and for that reason alone I think you should not use SharePoint. You also say that your app is going to be "non-standard" and complex, another reason not to use SharePoint.
Sounds like you know ASP.NET so I would advice to stick with ASP.NET or ASP.NET MVC.
Hope this helps
The answer is simple, you should go with what you know. If you prefer to do it in ASP.NET then, that is what you should go with. Trying to learn a new technology on that size of a project will almost certainty cause you severe problems when trying to develop it. Can sharepoint scale to that number of users, probably, but you don't know how to make it do that. That is the real key.
They are correct SharePoint does have a lot of functionality out of the box, but that doesn't mean that it will make you more efficient, because you don't know all of the APIs etc. to access.
Actually, if you want to know the way to cheat. If they force you into using it, you can run ASP.NET applications under SharePoint (well kind of). You can tell SharePoint to essentially ignore a path in the site and use regular ASP.NET as a web application just like any other site does. Really, this isn't using SharePoint, but it can get you out of a bind, in the "Needs to use SharePoint to make them happy scenario".
Mayo suggested contacting MS. I have a feeling they already have a relationship with the bank and have provided some insight about the project. I would contact: http://www.mindsharp.com/ and see if they can help you out. They are a training company, but I bet that the owners would be willing to help consult, and I haven't found anyone with more knowledge on SharePoint than Todd Bleeker.
I'll not go into the merits of sharepoint, but suffice it to say that I have been developing in sharepoint since it was known as "digital dashboard" - it was just a javascript-encrusted today page for outlook. With respect to its .NET incarnations, it has taken me about 3 years to become what some might call "expert" on SharePoint 2007/MOSS.
First up, let me give you some warnings concerning the politics of these kind of jobs. As a contractor, ALL of my jobs over the last 6 years - covering shaerpoint 2003 and 2007 - WITHOUT fail, have been getting about me on site with a client who has demanded sharepoint, and a development shop with decent ASP.NET developers who have become hopelessly lost and more than likely have blown 95% of the budget on the last 5% of the project because they have embarked on writing custom extensions to the platform without fully understanding the product.
If clients, and the shops who service them, spent more time understand the product and studied it to see how they could change/streamline their business processes & requirements slightly to suit sharepoint instead of being rigid in their specs (that were ALWAYS written with next to zero real experience of the platform) and deciding to get custom development done, then more sharepoint projects would be delivered on time and on budget. Sadly, this is not the case.
So, number one: SharePoint 2007 is an excellent product, but please, for the love of jeebus, find yourselves some top gun sharepoint developers who really understands the product before you embark on this journey. If you don't, you will all go down in flames.
-Oisin
What a load of CRAP that sharepoint isn't cut out for what the op wants to use it for. Especially the "Do not get yourself wrapped up in SharePoint" comment from ChaosPandion. Maybe he thought it to difficult and gave up...
Sure SharePoint development takes some getting used to, but it is able to what is wanted by the op most definately. SharePoint is built using ASP.NET so anything you do in ASP.NET can be used / ported to SharePoint. It is not a standalone product, but a DEVELOPMENT PLATFORM. It will scale to serve that many users, using multiple WFE's (Web Front Ends) and a SQL Cluster as backend.
The question here is: is sharepoint the most suited platform for building this site? Then I would have to answer, probably not, seeing as the wanted functionality is almost all custom development. If you plan on doing web content management as well, then yes, SharePoint is definately worth looking into. Also, SharePoint takes away all (or at least most :-D) authorisation and authentication wories. It is Department of Defense certified. And if the offered out of the box security is not enough, just write an authentication provider (seeing as SharePoint uses ASP.NET's provider model).
To answer your questions:
The bank IT told us that SharePoint has in fact lots of other features that will help us make the project more efficiently - for example, it seems that SharePoint has some built-in scalability and high availability technologies.
SharePoint is farm based, to which you can add machines, having each machine perform a different task, which means either app server, index server, WFE, document conversion services., WFE's can be behind a load balancer to distribute requests. Also I want to mention the web content management again.
I heard saying that SharePoint development is very tedious, that the platform cannot be very easily customized, etc.
Like I said, SharePoint is based on ASP.NET, so it is as much customizable as ASP.NET is. You could even create an ASP.NET web site, put all UI in Controls and then use those is SharePoint, maybe even have the controls use it's own database. As for it being tedious, not really. It's just DIFFERENT and deployment / testing is not like normal deployment / testing. SharePoint uses so called solution files (.wsp files), to package up functionality and deploy it to the server. This IMHO makes it possible to deploy functionality in a very modular way. Furthermore, there are loads of cool open source projects out there that make sharepoint development much easier and also provide cool extensions to "pimp" your site and make it more fun and easy to use for end-users.
Nuff said....
SharePoint development can be tedious but I'd hardly say the platform cannot be easily customized. I recently began developing with it full time and so far, I impressed at it's flexibility and suitability for my application but my needs are quite different from what you've described.
I understand 2007 is a vast improvement over 2003 so perhaps your information is only outdated. I hear 2010 is going to again be a significant improvement.
It's your job to deliver the functionality that the customer desires. If they desire a SharePoint solution, unless there's some particular reason why SharePoint really is a weaker model, that's what you should be able to deliver. In the event that SharePoint isn't a good fit, you need to be able to explain why to the bank's satisfaction. I'm not convinced "We don't know SharePoint" is an acceptable response in this situation: the bank's inclination should, at that point, be to find someone who knows both technologies well enough to deliver a product in SharePoint or better explain why SharePoint isn't actually what they want.
UPDATE: After looking at this more I would add that I do not believe that SharePoint is for you. As I mention below SharePoint is for collaboration. If the users that come to the site require an isolated experience then SharePoint is more overhead than you need.
SharePoint is built on top of ASP.NET so you have everything that you want to do with ASP.NET in addition to what SharePoint provides. Anyone who says that it is difficult is trying to make it that way. You can deploy stand alone custom pages with 100% of your own code and it will run under sharepoint, or you can create new application pages that also contain any code you want to write, or you can simply add your own webparts that can be added to any page you choose with 100% of your own code.
Here is just one example.
Creating an Application Page in Windows SharePoint Services 3.0
What SharePoint offers on top of that is a whole different paradigm on collaboration tools. If you wish to leverage it (if not the cost on return is somewhat limited) you can build amazingly complex and integrated solutions that is build around the aggregation of data from across an enterprise.
That being said, do not go into it lightly. If deployed wrong or with a half understanding of where SharePoint excels and where it does not will result in a diaster. Unless you have the time to understand the core concepts of SharePoint I would warn against it but your client is right. If you do build it in SharePoint you get a great deal more flexibility. One right off the bat is the ability to mix authentication modes. I designed a solution that mixed custom forms authentication with an LDAP backend with Windows Authentication. Anyone could visit the same pages but your authenticated account could come from two different locations.
This is a matter of what kind of concerns you want to have in the application:
Building it to look and function your way, go with sharepoint.
Building it to have infrastructure for authentication, permissions, http/web security, scalability, backup, database maintenance PLUS getting it to look and function your way (but now way more under your control), go with a more pure .NET approach.
I would pick the one I am best at, as Kevin said above.
Edit
More about Kevins post: you can also have your application under sharepoint but with full access to the API, in my projects we do it as a normal ASP.NET application, with own masterpages and everything, but we still use the authentication, lists and doc libraries for uploads, roleassignments for permissions etc. Its a very viable hybrid.
You said,
I heard saying that SharePoint
development is very tedious, that the
platform cannot be very easily
customized, etc.
You have been misinformed about SharePoint. All SharePoint pages are ASP.NET pages. You can customize any of them, either directly, or by using Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer, which is free.
Get started at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepoint/default.aspx.
SharePoint is a lot of work and with that amount of users I personally (and being a SharePoint developer) wouldn't bother.
I would go down the ASP.MVC route in all honesty and not because it's new and the latest buzz technology. I would use it because it's hands down faster. This site for example is written in ASP.NET MVC and it handles all these requests per day on I think 3 servers. 2 front end and 1 database. Correct my if I'm wrong with that.
The problem with asking whether Sharepoint is easy to customize is that there's a wide range of levels of customization people are experienced with. And for some reason, most people also seem to think that whatever level they customized Sharepoint to is the extent to which anyone else would also try to customize Sharepoint.
It's hard to talk about degrees of customization in concrete terms. What is "customization" to me is wrangling with the core DAL, fighting with bugs in the CAML to SQL query optimizers, overriding the SPListItem hydration pipeline, etc. To others, "customization" might mean building some web part widgets and deploying them in a WSP. If you find that there is some impedance mismatch between your logical model and Sharepoint's working model, you will have a really hard time reconciling the two.
Welcome to the dark land of politics.
It's worth making sure that your team properly evaluate and understand any compromises that SharePoint will have you make. Asking here is a good start. Things I'd look at include:
What's the whole solution going to include? Often the administration of a site can involve as much or more development work as the front end. While the 3M+ user front end is the glamorous part it may not be the bulk of the work.
Are there reference sites for 20K+ simultaneous user SharePoint sites? Honestly? What kind of hardware did that require? Is that available?
Get a small group of experienced contractors in for a few weeks to properly estimate the work, both on ASP.NET MVC and SharePoint. Make sure they've worked on large sites. (There's plenty of contractors around at the moment!)
Also, anticipate failure. Have a fall-back option:
If the MVC technologists win out, expect heat from senior management, and possibly even a skunk-works we'll-do-it-properly-anyway project that duplicates your efforts.
If you do end up with SharePoint, listen very carefully to users throughout the development process and be prepared to create Web parts, MVC pages or whathaveyou to address problem points.
I've been in a similar situation where it turned out that there was heavy vendor influence at a very senior level. The senior team had bought into SharePoint and required it to be used for all internal systems; the OCTO (Office of the Chief Technologist) had mandated open-source technologies. It was fun to watch the fur fly in the middle.
(Our option in the end was to use a service-based architecture based on REST, which effectively booted the current version of SharePoint out of the system altogether.)
I would build this on SharePoint. It is quite suitable for big sites and many sites have already been built on it: topsharepoint.com
SharePoint (like all complex applications) does require sufficient knowledge that you do not seem to have at the moment which is a big risk in my mind. Don't listen to the nay-sayers though.. lack of knowledge is a common problem for devs dealing with SharePoint but it doesn't mean you can't make it do whatever you want.
Regardless, what other options do you have? I think the days of building completely custom CMS's have passed just as building completely custom Intranets are not cost effective anymore. There are many competitors to what they want to do with SharePoint (Umbraco, Sitecore, Sitefinity, etc) and most of them seem better than 100% custom.
So the answer might be neither ASP.NET or Sharepoint..
I was involved in a SharePoint(WSS) project that was very data centric. The project consisted of more than 500 lists that has very complex relations between them. The client also asked for more than 350 Reports. Don't tell me why did you use SharePoint from the beginning. It was a managerial decision and we already delivered the project after 14 months of pain (this is 6 months overdue to the deadline)
When we first started the project, we didn't know anything about SharePoint development (believe it or not). The management said that they will take the risk. They were very convinced that SharePoint is the optimal solution for anything!!!(well, that proved wrong at the end of the project).
Anyway, we were learning SharePoint while we were developing. Our development were mainly based on SharePoint designer to customize all the AllItems/NewForm/EditForm/DispForm for every list to provide the needed logic/validation that the client asked for (Using JavaScript). We also implemented around 15 Custom Fields (e.g. master-details fields). We also made an event receiver to handle all the adding/updating/deleting... events for all the lists in the site. Plus around 40 ASP.Net user controls.
The main problems that faced us (we worked-around it but sadly in an inefficient way)
1- The Client asked for a search web part in each AllItems.aspx. The search web part should have multiple keys for the client to search with. We did that using Form Web parts using SPD no problem. But the real problem was how to search for a related field that was not in the current list. (So, in such cases we had to save these fields values in our list to be able to search for (crap, I know!!)). You might ask, why didn't you implement ASP.Net user controls for such task? Well, that would require us to forsake the default AllItems web part, and were already customized hundereds of AllItems.aspx pages with alot of customization that would take us a lot of time to reimplement them from the beginnging. Also, even if we used user controls, CAML is very inefficient in retrieving data from multiple related lists!
2- I think you can guess this one, if we've already faced a big time doing search web parts, how on earth will be able to do the 350 reports!!:D But we figured out a work-around (as usual :S) we made an Access DB file with links to all the 500 sharePoint lists, then we implemented a user control that has a report viewer control. This user controls takes an ordinary T-SQL Query to query on the Access DB, the Access DB retrieves the data from the SharePoint DB and pass it back to the user control which views the DataSet on the report viewer.
There are other administration related problems, but I would like to focus on the development here.
So, after I showed you the picture (sorry for the long post). What do you think was the best SharePoint development technique that we should have taken in such a data centric Project, if any?
I heard that some companies doesn't use lists at all in such projects, and builds there own SQL database tables instead of the SharePoint Database. But I can't keep my self from wondering, If I'm making my own DB, and hence implementing my CRUD web parts from scratch (We will also lose the security module benefits provided by SP Lists), what would be the benefits of SharePoint?
Once again I apologize for the long post.
I think you found out exactly what I did. Sharepoint just isn't good at handling large enterprise type applications. We ended up creating a custom database to house our data. We used Webparts for the user interface, but otherwise, the entire application was independent of Sharepoint.
In my opinion, Microsoft is overselling Sharepoint. It's actually good at team collaboration sites and simple Excel services applications, but anything beyond that it just isn't capable of handling.
I have to disagree with both Geoff and Abu in regards to SharePoint being a bad choice for large enterprise applications.
As you state yourself Abu your team were learning on the job as you had no SharePoint development experience, the issues you faced was more a Management error that a platform problem, management should have brought in SharePoint contractors to work alongside your team to help build what sounds to be a fairly complex system.
As a developer who has worked with SharePoint for a number of years many of the projects I have worked on some that I myself would not have believed suitable for SharePoint with in my first few years of developing on this platform, however now with more experience I know how to leverage the power of the platform far better and I realise the advantages gained using SharePoint for projects of that nature. That said I have a number of issues with parts of the platform but this is no different to any other platform I have worked on including parts of the ASP.Net platform.
If I was asked to develop a solution using a bespoke Java based system (or perhaps the new MVC platform) I am sure I would experience many problems similar to what you experienced where I simply don’t know what the right approach would be. That would not in any way be an issue with the platform but more with my inexperience.
I am sorry to hear that both of you experienced pains working within the bounds of the SharePoint platform that was forced on you by your management. Though I am disappointed that you are so fast to point the blame away from yourselves and your management.
Was SharePoint the best platform for your projects I can’t say, but that doesn’t make it a bad platform for enterprise applications.
I disagree with Geoff that SharePoint is no good for large enterprise type apps. You have to remember from the start that SharePoint is a development PLATFORM. This means it gives tyou a lot of functionality out of the box, but is extremely customisable.
Being a platform does not mean every bit of customisation needs to be done based on SharePoint lists. Seeing as it is built on ASP.NET you can do anything in SharePoint you could do in ASP.NET as well.
I have built a great deal of ASP.NET apps that were hosted in SharePoint, letting SharePoint do the authentication etc.
I have to say though, determining where SharePoint should stop being your base and you should switch to regular ASP.NET is sometimes hard..
If you are looking for a data-centric solution in SharePoint, the best solution is to use the Business Data Catalog (BDC). This keeps your rich data relationships and all of the SQL (or other DBMS) goodness you want where it should be - in a repository designed to be optimal at storing data.
For an overview of what the BDC functionality can do, see this post on the SharePoint Team Blog. For much more details, read the series on SharePoint Magazine. Note that these features requires an Enterprise license of SharePoint 2007.
Background:
I am an intermediate web app developer working on the .Net Platform. Most of my work has been defined pretty well for me by my peers or superiors and I have no problem following instructions and getting the job done.
The task at hand:
I was recently asked by an old friend to redo his web app from scratch. His app is extremely antiquated and he is getting overwhelmed by it breaking all the time. The app in question is an inventory / CRM application and currently each customer requires a new install of the app (usually accomplished by deploying it on a different domain on the same server and pointing to a new database).
Currently if any client wants any modifications to the forms such as additional fields, new features, etc my friend goes in and manually adds those fields to the forms, scripts, database etc. As a result all installs of this application are unique. There is no one singular source repository and no one single version of this app. Generally new features are overtime rolled into the other sites, but still this is done on an individual site by site basis.
I will be approaching this on a very modular basis. Initially I will be coding a module that will query an external web service for some data, display and store it, and periodically update it automatically. The next module will likely be for storing and displaying inventory data. This way I want to over time duplicate the current feature set of his app 100% but do it incrementally.
The Million Dollar Questions
I want to make the app have user
configurable form fields. The user
should be able to go to an admin
page, create a new forms page of a
certain category, and then specify
what fields he wants in there. He
could say 'create a new text field
called Item # and make it a
requirement" and that will get
stored somewhere. All forms will be
dynamically rendered to screen based
on what the user has configured. Is
this a good way to go about the
problem of having no idea what a
customer could want in a form? and
thus be able to store and display
form data of any sort ? What sort of
design pattern should I follow here?
I am familiar with asp.net and
the .net framework in general and
have decent knowledge of javascript,
html, silverlight, jquery, c# etc
etc. I can work my way around web
apps in a good way, but I am not
sure what sort of framework or tech
I should use to accomplish this
task. Would ASP.net 3.5 webforms be
the way to go? or should I look into
ASP.NET MVC? Do I use jquery and ajax for
complete decoupling of frontend and
backend ? or will a normal asp.net
page with some spattering of ajax
thrown in working with a codebehind
be the order of the day?
Just looking for general advice before I start.
I am currently thinking of using ASP.NET 3.5 webforms, jquery for clientside animation, ui, manipulation and data validation, and sqlserver + a .net or wcf webservice for backend.
Your advice is much appreciated as always.
I've recently implemented a white-label ecommerce system for an insurance company that allowed each partner to choose their own set of input fields, screens, and order the flow of the application to suit their individual needs.
Although it wasn't rocket science, it added complexity and increased development time.
Consider the user configuration aspect very carefully In hindsight both my client and their clients in turn, would have been happy with a more rigid system.
As for the tech side of your question, I developed my project in VS2005, using asp.net webforms and webservices with a SQLserver back end, so the stack that you're looking at is definitely capable of delivering a working product. ASP.net MVC will almost certainly help as far as testability goes.
The biggest thing I would change now if I was going to start again would be to replace the intermediate webservices with message based services using nServiceBus, MassTransit or the like. While the webservices worked fine, message based communication should be quicker and more reliable.
Finally, before you start to code, make sure that you understand the current system's functionality inside and out. If the new system doesn't do something that the old system did, it will be pretty obvious to the end users straight away.