次の方法で共有

What is going to happen with UIP?

  • [アーティクル]

Guess what. I started getting this question every month, then every week, then every day… now I get it every hour J, through different means: e-mail, blogs, e-mail threads I get included, communities.

 

So, I figured it would make sense to publish a clear statement and be a little bit more transparent.

 

The first half of the year 2006 was really dedicated to the Smart Client offerings: Desktop and Mobile. You probably noticed that already.

 

Now that we shipped both Software Factories, the team is focusing almost exclusively on the web space and a key deliverable we are currently planning is migration guidance for UIP. That is migration content for users currently using UIP on .NET 1.1 that want to move their application forward to ASP.NET 2.0 and probably using Workflow Foundation.

 

The complete deliverable for the web space will most probably be very similar to the rest of the factories from the content perspective (How-tos, Guidance Packages, a Reference Implementation, etc.). UIP migration will be a specifically called-out content though.

 

At this point we are in the initial planning of the project and in the process of collecting feedback from you guys. Anything you would like to share with us, let us know!!

 

One of the things I’m working on right now is a (hopefully) short list of the most frequent and complex challenges if Web App Development that then we will post as a (short and sweet) survey for you to answer. In the meantime, if you have the time to write me an e-mail with what your experience has been and where you’d like us to invest, please do so! And don't forget to set priorities.

 

Also remember, don’t send me code. Send me a description of your problems and what you’d like us to solve instead, and stay tuned to our communities (like UIP)

 

Last but not least, UIP is still supported of course as any other patterns & practices offering.

Comments

  • Anonymous
    July 17, 2006
    Recently I asked you all for your suggestions on what we should include in Enterprise Library for .NET...
  • Anonymous
    July 17, 2006
    It would be helpful if there would be some convergence between UIP and CAB - they seem to be complementary in some respects and overlap functionality in some respects - some sort of integration capability and insights to the same would help for those very heavily invested in UIP but would like to take advantage of the CAB to modularize parts of the UI (and other aspects of the application as well).
  • Anonymous
    July 17, 2006
    Concerned about path for Win Forms apps built on UIP.  Are there any plans there?
  • Anonymous
    July 17, 2006
    Eugenio,

    I've used the UIPAB version 2.0 to facilitate the UIP layer of a Web application I’ve been developing for a little over a year, and I have quite a few ideas I'd like to inject as input for the next version.  It might be more appropriate to send detailed feedback through email, so I'll just list a summary of a few ideas here.

    First, my number one desire is to see an MVC/MVP framework which doesn’t mandate the use of Tasks to function.    If the concept of Tasks is to be maintained in the next version, I’d like to see them be optional.

    Second, I’d like to see the next version be able to support Web applications whose underlying architecture is composite in nature.  My application’s architecture is very similar to the CAB, consisting of a main Web application framework “shell” which centrally manages authentication and navigation and provides module installation capabilities.  Each module of my application is a discrete unit of functionality (possibly developed by separate teams) and maintains its own configuration files (e.g. ~/Config/ShipModule/ship.config).  Each module specifies its own navigation graphs, views, etc.  I’d like to see the next version support different configuration sources allowing multiple “modules” to co-exist within a single Web application, each configuring their own UIP layers.  

    Also in support of composite based Web applications, I’d also like to see further abstraction in the navigation model to allow one module to register to handle another module’s navigation events (think “Navigation Broker”).  I envision something similar to the CAB’s Event Broker service in that one module could register to fulfill a navigation event raised by another module.  The event could be registered to allow only single subscribers or multiple subscribers.  Single subscribers might be used in the case where it makes sense to allow only one entity to fulfill the request (i.e. navigationEvent://MyModule/BrowseAddressBook).  Multiple subscribers could be processed in succession in use cases which allow other modules to extend an established workflow at a specific point (i.e. “navigationEvent://MyModule/PreCommitProcessing” or “navigationEvent://MyModule/WizardPreComplete”).


    Also, rather than focusing only on UIP concerns, has there been any discussion of going the route of creating a “Web Composite Application Block” which fulfills the same design goals as the CAB for Web applications?


    Derek Greer


  • Anonymous
    July 18, 2006
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    July 18, 2006
    I find that UIP works pretty well in .NET 2.0. With a couple of adjustments to the code though. The only annoying thing is that it is using Data Access Block from the previous version of the Ent Lib and of course there is no suport as of yet for the new .NET Framework 3.0 (formely known as WinFX), which is understandable since this is still work in progress.
  • Anonymous
    July 19, 2006
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    July 20, 2006
  1. App.xml need to be invisible from the user. Probably including it as a dll will be helpful.
    I don't want the user to change the xml file and create problems.

    2. Should be integrated with Enterpriselibrary2006.

    3. "Enterprise lebrary configuration" like xml writer will be helpful in writting app.xml file.

    4. XML based form generation should be included to generate some basic custom from.

  • Anonymous
    July 23, 2006
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    July 23, 2006
    I am new to Application Blocks, and the documentation for how to use the application blocks requires genius to understand. Is is possible to write some walk throughs? (eg. HelloWorld????)

  • Anonymous
    July 26, 2006
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    July 26, 2006
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    August 01, 2006
    I am new to UIP and CAB. We are starting on a project, and we are evaluating both UIP and CAB. I still have not been able to figure out the difference between UIP and CAB? When do we use UIP and when do we use CAB

  • Anonymous
    August 01, 2006
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    August 08, 2006
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    July 09, 2007
    There has not been a post here in almost a year. Are there still plans for more an updated version of UIP, migration guidance and a reference application?

  • Anonymous
    July 09, 2007
    Hi Cory - Yes, the UIP scenarios are covered now by the Web Client Factory and the "Page Flow App Block" that uses Workflow Foundation to drive UI workflows.  

  • Anonymous
    July 25, 2007
    Do we have a migration guidelines/guidance for the existing customers who are using UIPAB? Your response is highly appreciated.

  • Anonymous
    July 29, 2007
    The Web Client Software Factory has specific guidance for UIP users. Check: http://www.codeplex.com/websf And in particular: http://www.codeplex.com/websf/Wiki/View.aspx?title=Page%20Flow%20Application%20Block&referringTitle=Application%20Blocks There's one Quickstart that covers migration from UIP to WCSF through a sample: "Migrating from the UIP Application Block and Page Flow with Shopping QuickStart" Hope this helps eugeniop

  • Anonymous
    May 22, 2008
    Joe into pace <a href= http://joe-pace.barerube.cn >sheet Joe pace</a> [url=http://joe-pace.barerube.cn]sheet Joe pace[/url]

  • Anonymous
    December 08, 2008
    mortage ny rate <a href= http://forum.veracifier.com/showthread.php?p=10508 >news mortage rate</a> [url=http://forum.veracifier.com/showthread.php?p=10508]news mortage rate[/url]

  • Anonymous
    June 02, 2009
    So is that means UIPAB has been completely replaced by WCSF & SCSF? I am developing a WPF application. Should I use SCSF? Thx.