This project is read-only.

Questions for v3b87

  1. One of the ways we're considering to manage the scope of the Service Factory project is to port the security recipes exactly as they are in December (v2) release. By doing this, the security values will not be modeled, stored, or validated against other values outside of the recipe. We think this might not be that big of a deal since they only cover WCF (not WSE) which results only in configuration nodes. Are we missing something? What are your thoughts?
  2. Today, you must have .NET 3.0 installed (for WCF) in order to installed to install the factory. Is this okay? It would be quite a bit of work to remove this dependancy. Of course this requirement would not influence the target machine that would host the web service if you only built ASMX services - only the developers machine. Is this okay?
  3. Installation: We intend to ultimately release source code with straightforward instructions that will make it relatively easy to build the factory (an MSI) from source, which can then be deployed to the machines of a team of developers. How important is it to be able to install the factory directly from an MSI we provide? In other words, is it okay if you have to open the solution and build it before you use it? We know we can do this step for you and provide both source and binary installers, but there are other things we must do first. If it is important that we also provide binary installers, please provide justifying scenarios.
  4. Documentation: What are your expectations/recommendations about the docs? We suspect instructions for how to use each of the models is top priority. What about Web service architecture and how it maps to the Web services domain model? what would you be shocked NOT to find in the documentation for the "modeling edition" release?
  5. Are you using the extensibility walkthroughs? Do you feel we are addressing the most important extensibility scenarios? What types of changes do you expect you and your team will be making to this factory before you use it? Please help us identify these scenarios BEFORE we release Service Factory. Because we know more than 60% of the users of this factory will make changes to it, we want to make sure making these changes is as easy as possible. We even have a dedicated person addressing this need. The window of opportunity is closing - please help.

Last edited Jun 29, 2007 at 2:46 AM by donsmith, version 1


RahulMehta Aug 7, 2007 at 4:57 PM 
I am a newbie to Sevice factory and now trying to use v3b87, but unable to do so due to issues with build. I get the following error for several unit test projects. Can you help with this??

Microsoft Visual Studio
The project file 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft Service Factory\Wssfv3\Data Contract DSL\Unit Tests\DataContractDsl.Tests\DataContractDsl.Tests.csproj' cannot be opened.

The project type is not supported by this installation.
OK Help

pbromberg Aug 2, 2007 at 12:31 PM 
OK. I'm going through the Getting Started document completely.

dawarn Aug 1, 2007 at 4:10 AM 
1. No Comment
2. We use WCF (have migrated all old code) and do not plan on going back to WSE.
3. My team has had troubles using anything that cannot be installed with an msi. Getting then to give it a try is impossible.
4. I agree that the walktroughs are more usefull than the docs. The walkthrough was all I needed.
5. Plan on looking into it when I can get the team to just start using it.

toso06 Jul 27, 2007 at 4:22 PM 
Good walkthrough

1. Sounds OK.
2. We only use WCF services.
3. A binary installer is not required because we always modify something but you would probably get more Service Factory users because it would be easier to try out.
4. Yes, you should concentrate on how the models should be used.
5. Sorry, can’t help you with that one yet.

dennismulder Jul 20, 2007 at 10:36 PM 
My Answers for V3b87
1) This sounds OK, although I am not very familiair with the security recipes.
2) This is fine! I hope it will improve .NET 3.0 adoption. :)
3) In my opinion this is a requirement, because it is easy to make mistakes if you leave it up to your team, including enforcing the same keys etc. In order to properly prioritize, we'd have to know what we don't get if you create a proper installer...
4) Best practices on the size of the models, how many services/operations, how to distribute across different models.
Extensibility scenarios for versioning (I'd rather have that in the main release imho, see the Groove site for suggestions)
5) Versioning, see my suggestions on the Groove Workspace.

sujit Jul 11, 2007 at 9:45 PM 
1. No comment - have not looked into Security recipes yet.
2. Not a problem to make .NET 3.0 a pre-requisit.
3. We intend to modify the service factory extensively before making it available to the development community, so it's not an issue for us. I guess is there are folks that would like to consume the factory directly and as-is, a binary installer would be nice. Specially good for people evaluating the service factory.
4. I think the walkthroughs are more usefull than the docs since using the DSL is something new here. The docs are good for reference but I pretty much got the hang of it through the walkthroughs.
5. YES - we are using the extensibility walkthroughs extensively. They are spot-on in thier scenarios. We are adding custom projects, providing model templates, and adding import facilities to allow services and data contracts to be created automatically by reflecting on existing business objects. We are also planning to allow the designer to 'split' services so that they can be implemented by different teams of developers and then later be combined back into one service.

A note on the compilation steps for the source code:
I had to turn off disable Manifest Validation in the Clarius Toolkit settings in order to compile the code.

biaachmonkie Jul 7, 2007 at 8:53 PM 
I'm unable to generate the Product Key, Any ideas?

Project "C:\WssfV3Src\PostInstall.proj" (default targets):

Target Build:
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\SDK\v2.0\bin\sn.exe -q -k Product
C:\WssfV3Src\PostInstall.proj(8,3): error MSB6006: "sn.exe" exited with code
Done building target "Build" in project "PostInstall.proj" -- FAILED.

Done building project "PostInstall.proj" -- FAILED.

C:\WssfV3Src\PostInstall.proj(8,3): error MSB6006: "sn.exe" exited with code 1.
0 Warning(s)
1 Error(s)

Time Elapsed 00:00:13.48

ClemensReijnen Jul 6, 2007 at 6:33 AM 
My Answers for V387
1. This means that we have to run the recipes after the code generation, what will happen when we regenerate the code from the model? Does that mean that we have to run the recipes again? That will be bad…
2. Okay for me, still waiting for the Orcas version ;-)
3. I think most of us will change the Factory en has to make our own installers. A how to would be nice.
4. Maybe something about, how to use it with TFS and source safe, how to handle different versions of the factories in your production environment. Documentation is not that important for this moment, I will ask my peers [who are not that conformable with DSL’s].
5. At this moment I’m extending the “Implement application” functionality of the application designer [Team Architect Edition, Orcas version]. I use the .AD file to generate WCF services. Because the designer has a lot of knowledge [almost everything] about the application endpoints [services]I can generated complete WCF services of it… what I want to do when the GAX and WSSF is ported to Orcas, is to generate the models from the .AD file. So the knowledge I must have to do that is how to generate a service model from a different file then WSDL.