|
I limit myself to the ones shipped by Microsoft. Ones like the UWP / WPF tool kits. No issues.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
+1 to avoid Nuget. It always was and is COMPROMISE to build process - you nerver be sure smth is not changed. And never sure what and when "it" will download. Definitely "school boys" who bring this sh****t to .NET (from Linux) didn't have enough qualification and enterprise development at all.
Say "no" to drugs, say "no-no-never!!" to nuget. 
|
|
|
|
|
It's the worst dependency management option, apart from all of the other options.
Jon Skeet wrote about some of the problems a while back:
Versioning limitations in .NET | Jon Skeet's coding blog[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
We use them.
I hate them.
Nothing worse than that one person on staff who has to run off and try every bell and whistle.
Multiple layers of code across a dozen libraries just to put a form on a page.
I cannot wait to retire.
|
|
|
|
|
This generations spin on DLL hell. It's not so bad when you have one or 2 packages that stand on their own. But when the packages have dependencies on other packages which depend on other packages. And one package want v2.0 and another wants v2.2, it becomes a kluge. TFS seems to choke on pulling solutions and ACTUALLY recognize package dependency. Or do recognize and tell me packages are installed but throws errors of missing references no matter how often I refresh or clean/build, etc. Often have to delete the reference and readd.
Local nuget seems to have helped some.. Until a genius updates a package (or packages) and decides it should have all the latest and greatest dependent packages without thinking about downstream impact and ends up breaking stuff. Thats more of an internal problem but still an example of how wrong things can go in a nuget world.
Our team has lovingly referred to it as NO-GET.
|
|
|
|
|
I've got some code still running out in the wild circa 2005-ish, I used next to no external libraries, so there is not much fear of being able to fix an issue (as long as I can get the old IDE working  )
I have some newer stuff, code about 3 years old that broke badly when the vender disappeared, and the current framework broke the old vendors code.
I am weary of depending on too much of external libraries like NuGet because of past experiences.
Sure these libraries can speed development up like crazy if you don't care about the product 5 years down the road, or think it will all be re-written by then.
|
|
|
|
|
NuGet is a publishing platform. If a vendor up and disappears, your dependence on their library (maybe as an interface for their API or hardware) is still in danger whether they publish their library on NuGet, the web, or a thumb drive. At least with NuGet, you know the library is available in its present form, compared to a website the vendor stops paying for.
In general, a dependency should be easily replaceable if it is intrinsic to functionality. And while larger vendors have a smaller chance of disappearing, a dependency without abstraction can still impose a risk to efficient replacement. Just ask Parler.
|
|
|
|
|
So I see three issues mentioned that have nothing to do with NuGet:
1. Version conflicts for common dependencies between libraries
2. Auto-updates
3. Package configurations which say a new version is compatible with your project
NuGet doesn’t magically solve #1 for you, though it *can* update your references for the simple case, if you let it. Which highlights that #2 is not normally the default. Finally, #3 is the fault of the packager, not the deliverer. It’s easy to configure things wrong, and for the misconfiguration to go unnoticed if it’s new or exotic enough.
What NuGet does help you solve is keeping your source control download small, especially if the bulk of your code is libraries, unless someone unknowingly checks in the “packages” folder.
|
|
|
|
|
How are you people in Microsoft ecosystem, and not using NuGet pacakges? Is it some kind of April Fools joke? It's been probably one of the biggest productivity improvements in the last decade. We ended up migrating all our internal libraries to NuGet as well, and integrated the process into our CI pipeline. Learn how to use the tool, before complaining about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed, I got the feeing we’re being trolled, or punked, at least.
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft distributes its libraries via NuGet in Visual Studio. I could not work without it. And versioning problems? Have you ever tried to compile an open source project with loads of dependencies?
|
|
|
|
|
If this is a Leslie, so be it. But for those not initiated, here's a horror video for you, made even more horrifying by the god-awful laugh track. (And don't ask me where the term 'god-awful' comes from - I don't know - yet.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like they really love Power Point. I haven't used PP in years.
|
|
|
|
|
Didn't make it past the first minute, ugh!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was hilarious 
Could've done without the laugh track though.
I'm just waiting for my customers to switch from Excel to PowerPoint for doing everything including business critical computations and handling user data 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I'm just waiting for my customers to switch from Excel to PowerPoint for doing everything
In my company the mechanical, electrical, and chemical engineers tend to use Excel for all of their documentation.
You haven't lived until you've navigated a 100+ sheet Excel file, where each sheet is a page of a specification and each sheet may generate multiple printed pages of hard copy.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I see nothing out of the ordinary
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure even the subject line of your post violates KSS and maybe even violates KS, herself.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
I pray it doesn't haunt your nightmares, nor those of your sisters. Sorry!
|
|
|
|
|
For a while Houdini used a trap door in every show he did - but it was just a stage he was going through.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
I saw half that remark coming but was un-curtain of the outcome. I wand-er if this can chain-ge the followups?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
That was like a gut-punch.
(What? Too soon?)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
