I am trying to think about a web application development framework for our product development. I want to build an ASP.NET application which has many sub-modules in it. My requirements are like:
The application will be a suite of different modules like CRM, Bugtracker, Inventory management, Finance management etc.
Each Module should have their own DLLs.
One project should be for the external container of the application (like the framework) and this project should bring all other modules (of type web application) in the solution to the external container. (Some thing like we have Frames in HTML). So we will publish the external container web application only at the end of the day and all other web application projects will be accessed via that.
I would like to have separate DLL for each module so I don't need to fear about the application breaking when I am deploying my single DLL which controls the entire suite.
I am not sure whether my thoughts are in the right direction. The end result I am looking for is a well-maintained, organized, and modular web application suite.
It is ASP.NET web forms, not MVC. I will use VS2010 for development.
What are the best approaches to do this?
Edit:
The term external container means it acts like a master page which has links to various modules and the various modules are not always in the same project. They can be separate project under the same solution. And I am under the impression that, by the end of the day, I will publish that project only and it will bring the various modules to it.
I actually think the best approach would be one that does not over-architect. I'm concerned that it seems you are producing an overall architecture without sufficient reason.
Are these all new modules? Then just start writing the first one. Use best practices that apply to single modules.
Then write the second one. You'll find you want to use things you already wrote in the first module. Great. That's what refactoring is for. Refactor these things out into one or more "library" projects, re-run all your unit tests, then proceed with the second module.
Repeat until all modules are done.
At the end of this process, if you needed the kind of architecture you've outlined, then you'll have it. If you needed less, then you'll have less, and you will not have spent time creating an architecture which is not tied to real-world requirements.
I'm not going to say this is a "best approach" but I would recommend looking over Dot Net Nuke (DNN) to get some ideas. This started as the old "I Buy Spy" starter web project that Microsoft distributed to show ASP.NET projects, and it took off from there.
edit:
1.The application will be a suite of different modules like CRM, Bugtracker, Inventory management, Finance management etc.
You can do this with DNN. They're also called "modules" in DNN and Drupal.
2.Each Module should have their own DLL's.
Yes, this is a good idea. And you'll see this sort of thing in several content management systems like DNN and Drupal. This way not all implementations of the same website need to have all modules installed.
We have a significant website that is used to host a "service as a solution" application that we charge for (if you aren't an actuary or accountant you won't have heard of it). The lead developer for the past couple years used an earlier version of DotNetNuke as a model for how to refactor the parts of the application that he was allowed to change.
Like others have suggested DNN would probably work for what you're trying to do. If you want to completely roll your own naturally I would turn to some sort of combination of a container "Framework" and a bunch of user controls (.ascx). The container could be as simple as a master page with a menu. Depending on how flexible you want your design you can prefabricate many different pages, each hosting a different control (separate dll as you wish). If you want it to be a little more dynamic you can have one content page that will dynamically load at runtime the desired user control into it. Again this is just a general approach, probably a 30000 feet view into how DNN is implemented anyway.
Name the main project after your company/product and keep it short and simple. You will probably need one or two library projects to support it - these will contain everyday, common logic for such things as error reporting, Web utility methods, etc.
Next, pick one of your intended sub-projects (I don't like the term module in this particular context) and add that to your solution. Whether you are reusing an existing project, or preferably starting from scratch, you will eventually have any common logic in this project moved out to your libraries.
Rinse and repeat. Perhaps take a look at something similar like the Sueetie project which includes several sub-projects like CMS, Blog, Calendar, Forum, etc.
The following article is marked as "outdated" on MSDN but I still think you should take a look at it:
Structuring Solutions and Projects
Also, something similar from the Patterns and Practices Group:
Structuring Projects and Solutions in Team Foundation Source Control
Related
Multiple Asp.Net Framework 4.6.2 MVC/Razor projects within a single solution.
They use Areas, and each project will implement one or more Areas, distinct from the other.
One project acts as the "primary", and includes the global.asax.
The "subordinate" apps can know about the "primary", but not vice versa.
Is it possible to deploy these to the same web site? (on-prem VM).
There would be some collisions, such as the _Layout.cshtml.
Some how I'd have to be able to setup dependency injections for the classes in the "subordinate" project assembly.
Thanks
-John
I don't think this is possible easily, because so much of an MVC site is pre-compiled into DLLs, and yet some of it (e.g. view files) must be actually physically deployed outside the DLL. You are likely to run into conflicts or confusion I think. It's certainly not a reliable, definable process that you could count on in production.
Here are some alternative suggestions to solve the underlying problem, based on what you described in the comments. These are just ideas, some of which I've done or seen done, and might not suit you, but any of them should be a lot easier to manage than trying to bodge the deployment process:
1) Try building the areas in separate projects as you do now, but without all the generic MVC stuff that surrounds it. I.e. Do it as if they were libraries only containing the files specific to their functionality. Then you can package them up as Nuget packages. When they're ready, install the packages into the "main" site to create the combined solution. That way you won't run into conflicts of layout pages etc. If one of the sub-projects changes, then the main site can just upgrade the NuGet package. You can create private NuGet feeds either via Visual Studio Online (if you have a subscription) or on the simplest level via a shared network folder. I think other online vendors offer private feeds as well. We've done that quite successfully to apply some default styles, scripts, layouts etc to all our various MVC apps.
2) Re-architect your solution as a series of separate apps (that's the bit you've already got), but with a central service that provides federated authentication/authorisation (e.g. ADFS, IdentityServer or similar), and a web API (or APIs) that the other sites can call to access other centralised services and functions programatically. I'm pretty confident you can use routing config and shared sessions to make it all hang together as if it was actually one site.
3) Build it all out as just one site, but with clear separation for the various teams about the back-end services, classes etc that they are responsible for, so they don't interfere with each other's code. Each team can check-in code to different branches in source control and only merge to the shared branches for integration/system testing and deployment. You can use a continuous integration server to test the build process after each check-in, and if you have robust code review and gated check-ins you can stop people changing stuff that they shouldn't. You also have the flexibility to release with/without updates from the various areas, if the development lifecycles are going at different speeds.
4) Some combination of all of the above!
I'm working in a web application that has several areas of bussiness work. With time it's size has became a problem to develop on and to maintain.
I would like to break the web project into several sub-projects or libraries depending on a main root web project that has the common files to share (Masterpages, Resources, Css, etc...)
Ideally I would like to have some kind of injection that allows me to optionally publish that "components" or simply publish a customized variation, although it's configuration depended on after deploy DB setup.
I searched all over the web, reading all the pages related to multiple projects, dependency injection and composite apps that I could find, 'till I soften my head, but couldn't find anything really useful.
Major part of the writings where a theoretical approaches or unit testing applications (well, you can't make your desired app, but you still can unit test something else)
Other approaches simply don't work in VS2010 .Net 4.0
Can someone address me on a COMPLETE solution or an example? Or simply lets discuss.
We say that the solution has the following structure, with module contents already separated into directories:
Solution
L_ Datalayer library project
L_ Bussiness logic /common utils library project
L_ Web project
L_ Controls
L_ Images
L_ Css....
L_ Warehouse
L_ Sales
Masterpages
...
Warehouse and Sales contains pages related to the "module"
Thanks,
I post my progress in the subject.
As per suggestion of Steven I experimented further more using MEF. Due to the lack of documentation, specially for webforms, that was a pain in*. So far I managed to implement MEF in my solution and sucessfully inserted a plugin project visible for the main app.
Then loads the available plugins, through an interface that has the plugin name, the default page url and its order, picks all this data and render a menu tab. That part it's easy.
Clicking on a menu element must redirect to the main page of the plugin, which will render several menus for its pages contained (from another export interface)
I finally got an aspx page embedded as a resource in the plugin project. Where I'm currently stuck.
¿Is there any way to render a page embedded as a resorce on a libray using MEF or I'm forced to also use a VirtualPathProvider? ¿Hows specifically the statement to redirect to that page? I've tried several ways but no-one works (MEF and VirtualPathProvider)
I looked at zillion of articles that talk about it but all them end doing control rendering, not page. So frustrating.
Though it is not an answer to your question, I am adding it as answer due to length of my suggestion.
I suggest you look into the approach NopCommerce is following where they have extended over .net with their own framework, which supports Plugins and extensions to existing solutions. Though I definitely know that nopcommerce is an ecommerce solution but if you study it, you can modify it according to your business needs or at least it can give you a heads on for what you should adopt while designing your solution. Hope it helps.
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
We have a series of ASP.Net applications that have been written over the course of 8 years. Mostly in the first 3-4 years. They have been running quite well with little maintenance, but new functionality is being requested and we are running into IDE and platform issues. The apps were written in .Net 1.x and 2.x and run in separate spaces but are presented as a single suite of applications which use a common navigation toolbar (implemented as a user control). Every time we want to add something to a menu in the nav we have to modify it in all the apps which is a pain. Also, the various versions of Crystal reports and that we used tables to organize the visual elements and we end up with a mess, especially with all the multi-platform .Net versions running. We need to streamline the suite of apps and make it easier to add on new apps without a hassle. We also need to bring all these apps under one .Net platform and IDE.
In addition, there is a WordPress blog styled to match the style of the application suite "integrated" into the UI and a link to a MediaWiki Wiki application as well.
My current thinking is to use an open source content management system (CMS) like Joomla (PHP based unfortunately, but it works well) as the user interface framework for style templating and menu management. Joomla's article management would allow us to migrate the Wiki content into articles which could be published without interfering with the .Net apps. Then essentially use an IFrame within an "article" to "host" the .Net application, then...
Upgrade the .Net apps to VS2010, strip out all the common header/footer controls and migrate the styles to use the style sheets used in the CMS.
As I write this, I certainly realize this is a lot of work and there are optimization issues which this may cause as well as using IFrames seems a bit like cheating and I've read about issues with IFrames.
I know that we could use .Net application styling, but it seems like a lot more work (not sure really). Also, the use of a CMS to handle the blog and wiki also seems appealing, unless there is a .Net CMS out there that can handle all of these requirements.
Given this information, I am looking to know if I am totally going in the wrong direction? We tried to use open source and integrate it over time, but not this has become hard to maintain. Am I not aware of some technology out there that will meet our requirements? Did we do this right and should we just focus on getting the .Net streamlined? I understand that no matter what we do, it's going to be a lot of work. The communities considerable experience would be helpful. Thanks!!
PS - A complete rewrite is not an option.
Hmm, we're in the midst of a project to do something that sounds familiar. We're using www.sitecore.net CMS but you could use the Open Source alternative Umbraco again both of these will have a learning curve, but they're .Net apps and aren't targetted specifically at blogs. SiteCore ultimately can use normal .Net user controls if you want, though it's slightly against their model, but it works.
One thing I'll warn you of is SiteCore Must be the root of your website, it has to control the root of the domain (it has a urlrewriting module that needs to be at the root) and you can tell it to exclude certain folders where your applications might live. You can obviously put your navigation in a folder under the root of the site. Also note SiteCore's a .Net 3.5 application running under the 2.0 runtime.
Are your sub-applications.. Actual seperate applications in virtual dirs or something I'm guessing?
Depending on the nature of the .Net apps, you may find DotNetNuke to be a useful choice.
It's a CMS where you write widgets ('modules') in .Net, then add them to the pages of the CMS. In your case, you'd wrap your existing functionality in such widgets. I've done exactly this several times, and now that I'm used to it it's no big deal.
The downside is you have to learn to swim in the DNN environment, which (like any CMS) has a bit of a learning curve.
I'd have to know a lot more about your existing apps to be sure this is a plausible option. If it looks appealing, you should probably contact someone who's dealt with a situation like yours (such as myself) and go into detail. It's very easy to find yourself in a dead end with these CMS frameworks.
Edit: Like a product mentioned in a different answer, DNN has to control the top level of its subdomain -- all requests begin by going through Default.aspx and are then dispatched in various ways.
For our company I'm creating a big Extranet website which will feature a set of sub-applications. I'm a bit puzzled by what should be the right setup of the solution and projects.
I have one web application that we call the Portal. It contains the authentication/authorization classes, masterpages, navigation/url routing classes and theme definitions. It will also contain some basic overviews for our customers to get a quick idea of their project status.
In the coming year we are going to develop and integrate more applications with the portal. Think of it as detailed overviews and tools called Feature A, B and C. Over the years we will improve these applications and release new versions. These web applications should fit into the navigation of the Portal seamlessly. I'd like them to reuse the masterpages and themes.
What is the proper way to setup this solution?
How can I tie the applications together, re-use the master pages and keep it maintainable?
How can I share certain webcontrols (ASCX) in a proper way?
We are using TFS, perhaps any branching/merging ideas?
Edit:
I'd like to create it in ASP.Net WebForms, we have the most experience in that area. But basically we can use anything, we've got the webserver under our own control (as long as it is Microsoft oriented, not switching to php or something like that :))
What is the proper way to setup this solution?
The proper way... There are so many. I have seen a lot of applications, and a lot of different setups (a lot of which that I would deem "proper"). What you're really asking is for the best way for your situation.
Because you're building a portal, you'll have the luxury of feature separation which will help you as you develop additional features for your application.
I would setup a single website with a separate folder for each feature. Making it a single website will allow all features to share the same masterpages, usercontrols, and configuration file - without having to do anything special. (On that note, I would put all your master pages in a folder by themselves, and create another folder for your usercontrols).
How can I tie the applications together, re-use the master pages and keep it maintainable?
Again... folders are the best option here. Folders will help separate each feature, making the application easy to manage.
How can I share certain webcontrols (ASCX) in a proper way?
First of all, ascx files are not webcontrols. They are usercontrols. WebControl is a class for creating server controls that reside in a separate assembly. Regarding usercontrols, as I said above, if you put them in a separate folder, they're always in one place and available throughout the application.
We are using TFS, perhaps any branching/merging ideas?
There really isn't anything special you need to do here. There are a lot of different paths you can take regarding branching:
One is to create a branch for every release.
Another is to create a branch for every new feature you add (in your case, this is pretty much the same as the first option).
Yet another is to create a branch for each developer.
When I decide how I am going to branch my code, I think about what will protect me the most. In your case, you need to plan for bug fixes in between feature releases so maybe one branch after each release makes the most sense (call it your dev branch). Given the separation of features, though, one feature may not effect the rest of the application. You may not need this kind of branching to be safe.
As Brian says when making an API public you should commit to it as much as possible, which means it should change as little as possible after the initial release. However to make something that stable requires lots of effort up front so if you aren't ready to commit to the API you should instead internalize it as much as possible and for that reason you might want to combine things more than separating them.
However, I'm not going to suggest an architecture that fits your application based on a 5 paragraph description. What you need to do is to weight pros and cons of having a few big projects vs. having a bunch of loosely coupled small projects. I mean, the more planning you do up front, the easier you will have it down the line, provided you stick with the plan.
So contrary to Brians answer, I wouldn't recommend you make your entire system "as loosly coupled as possible", only that you make it as loosly coupled as it needs to be. ;) Loosely coupled code can cause as much trouble as tightly coupled code, if you are abusing it.
See:
1. What is better, many small assemblies, or one big assembly?
2. Specific down-sides to many-‘small’-assemblies?
In the end, only you know how much you want to focus on each of the "...bilities", maintainability, extensibility, reliability etc. So get your priorities and goals straight and plan accordingly.
Regarding branching strategies you could read the TFS Branching Guideline 2.0 which have a good introduction to various branching strategies ranging from basic to advanced. Even if you don't use TFS this is a good guide to read (I use SVN at the moment). Since I currently work in small teams with 1-4 devs, I tend to use a strategy that is between basic and standard. Not that I'm recommending this for you, but that whats works best for our team.
As for sharing code between projects. In SVN we can use "externals" which means that the shared file will appear in several folders so when you change one copy and commit the change to svn, all the other copies will be updated on the next svn update. However, I can't remember if TFS have something similar.
Note: Beware of externals in SVN... they can cause... problems. ;)
My advice is to try to avoid sharing aspx, ascx and master pages as much as possible. It usually hurts a lot more than it helps. Instead try to use inheritance or other alternatives to achieve your goal.
ASP.NET MVC 2.0 has a concept called "Areas" where you build subsections of an application in isolation from the rest. As far as I know these areas can be maintained in separate projects from the "main" application. It sounds a lot like what you are requesting so maybe you should look into that.
Hope it makes sense. ;)
I would look at making your system as loosely coupled as possible. As/when you add more applications, your website will become less and less reliable (since no component will be up 100% of the time, combining these will reduce your overall reliability). So you should build your system to cater for the non-major services being down (I believe the Amazon homepage, for example, has 100-ish services contributing to it, and as such it's built to be fault-tolerant)
Your APIs between services should remain as stable as possible, such that the implementations can change without breaking the coupling. You should also investigate automated testing of this at the web level (perhaps Selenium or similar?) since testing the individual services will give you little coverage re the overall behaviour.
You might find it useful to look at implementing a custom VirtualPathProvider. On my last project we had multiple ASP.NET sites which needed to share theme files (master pages, user controls, images, style sheets) so I created a VirtualPathProvider which allowed us to map a virtual folder (e.g. /Themes) to any physical folder on the hard drive (e.g. C:\Shared\SiteThemes).
It's not trivial but didn't take too long and hasn't caused any problems. Incidentally it turned out to be a great way to overcome the maximum component limit in WiX... Note that you can't precompile sites that use a VirtualPathProvider.
Use MVC Concepts from now. they give more extendability and flexibility for a robust applications.
You might look at using SharePoint. It's a pretty decent platform for ASP.NET application delivery, particularly if they coexist in an intranet environment; it gives you a lot of stuff for free.
Of course, it has very rough elbows, so to speak, so proceed with caution.
I wouldn't think of the applications as seperate but as modules of the overall portal.
I would recommend you look into MEF as this would seem to be a perfect fit.
http://blogs.msdn.com/hammett/archive/2009/04/23/mef-and-asp-net-mvc-sample.aspx