Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner. It is now read-only.

Move NancyOwinHost to core. #1544

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Jun 11, 2014
Merged

Move NancyOwinHost to core. #1544

merged 5 commits into from Jun 11, 2014

Conversation

@khellang
Copy link
Member

khellang commented May 25, 2014

I think it's time we address this and start a discussion on how to structure/package things moving forward, and what better way to do that than with a pull request? 馃槈

This PR renamesNancyOwinHost to NancyMiddleware and moves it to the core project, (still) under the Nancy.Owin namespace.
The AppBuilderExtensions are left intact in the Nancy.Owin project. API-wise, this is not even a breaking change 馃憤

I also added extensions for the Action<Func<AppFunc, AppFunc>> approach for adding middleware, used in the new IBuilder.UseOwin extensions. This means that you can now do

public void Configure(IBuilder app)
{
    app.UseOwin(owin => owin.UseNancy());
}

in ASP.NET vNext, without other dependencies than core Nancy 馃懐

Fixes #1387

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
using System;

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@jchannon

jchannon May 25, 2014

Member

Put usings under the namspaces declaration human stylecop strike

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@grumpydev

grumpydev May 25, 2014

Member

zOMG! Good job @thecodejunkie isn't watching!

image

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@khellang

khellang May 25, 2014

Author Member

Problem is then you have to declare the Funcs with full names, e.g.

using AppFunc = System.Func<System.Collections.Generic.IDictionary<string, object>, System.Threading.Tasks.Task>

So I think it's worth the tradeoff (what is the tradeoff, exactly? 馃槤)...

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@grumpydev

grumpydev May 25, 2014

Member

Tbh, the funcs in owin are so much smaller these days I'm not sure I see the point in aliasing them.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@grumpydev

grumpydev May 25, 2014

Member

And the tradeoff is that putting them inside the namespace scopes them correctly, which can avoid issues with namespace collisions.. on the flip side, putting them outside of the namespace gets you stabbed in the belly by @thecodejunkie, who will grow a Sparta-eque beard just for the occasion.

Swings and roundabouts really.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@damianh

damianh May 28, 2014

Member

The latter is what turns up in intellisense though.
On 28 May 2014 09:26, "Kristian Hellang" notifications@github.com wrote:

In src/Nancy/Owin/DelegateExtensions.cs:

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+锘縰sing System;

the funcs in owin are so much smaller these days I'm not sure I see the
point in aliasing them.

It looks a bit nicer with

UseNancy(this Action)

than

UseNancy(this Action<Func<IDictionary<string, object>, Task>, Func<IDictionary<string, object>, Task>>)

[image: 馃槈]


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/1544/files#r13118572
.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@khellang

khellang May 28, 2014

Author Member

I agree it looks fugly, but who cares about the signature anyway? As long as you get the extension methods 馃槃 This problem could probably be solved with your proposed global alias?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@damianh

damianh May 28, 2014

Member

Probably not - aliases are only good within a project. AssemblyNeutral delegates would be nice though (if that even makes sense)

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@damianh

damianh Jun 11, 2014

Member

In the name of consistency, which I value more, +1 for putting them inside the namespace scope. I do this and live with it.

@grumpydev
Copy link
Member

grumpydev commented May 25, 2014

Something is very wrong with this PR.. it's from @khellang and Travis has actually built without errors :shipit:

@jchannon
Copy link
Member

jchannon commented May 25, 2014

Its Sunday, Travis takes the day off

@khellang
Copy link
Member Author

khellang commented May 25, 2014

lol. yeah, crazy! I just popped a 馃嵑 to celebrate! 馃槈

@jchannon
Copy link
Member

jchannon commented May 25, 2014

Reckon we could get this in 0.23?

@grumpydev
Copy link
Member

grumpydev commented May 25, 2014

Could do.. tbh the most important part is probably obsoleting the old extension method, although I am still not sure what the message should be.

There is value in having the owin stuff in core though I suppose.

@grumpydev grumpydev added this to the 0.23 milestone May 25, 2014
/// <param name="builder">The application builder delegate.</param>
/// <param name="action">A configuration builder action.</param>
/// <returns>The application builder delegate.</returns>
public static Action<MiddlewareFunc> UseNancy(this Action<MiddlewareFunc> builder, Action<NancyOptions> action)

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@damianh

damianh May 27, 2014

Member

The suggested builder signature is Action<IDictionary<string, object>, MidFunc> ... which isn't even a proposal yet.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@khellang

khellang May 27, 2014

Author Member

Say what? No one's said this was BuildFunc. I assume you're hinting at the name? Do you have a suggestion?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@damianh

damianh Jun 11, 2014

Member

Right, ignore moi

@damianh
Copy link
Member

damianh commented May 28, 2014

Keep Nancy.Owin - IAppBuilder and owin.dll will be around for some time yet.

+1 to moving NancyOwinHost to core. Though I'd rename it to NancyMiddleware myself, because Owin Hosts are things like Nowin, HttpListener etc.

@thecodejunkie thecodejunkie modified the milestones: 0.24, 0.23 Jun 4, 2014
@grumpydev grumpydev modified the milestones: Future, 0.24 Jun 10, 2014
@khellang
Copy link
Member Author

khellang commented Jun 10, 2014

And NancyMiddleware was born

@damianh damianh modified the milestones: 1.0Alpha, Future Jun 11, 2014
@damianh damianh self-assigned this Jun 11, 2014
@damianh
Copy link
Member

damianh commented Jun 11, 2014

After we get some consensus on the using declarations, I'll pull it in! (sooo excited, I pee'd a little)

@grumpydev
Copy link
Member

grumpydev commented Jun 11, 2014

Move em inside :)

@khellang
Copy link
Member Author

khellang commented Jun 11, 2014

Done... mmm, so much better. not 馃槈

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
/// <summary>
/// Nancy host for OWIN hosts

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@jchannon

jchannon Jun 11, 2014

Member

its not a host?? 馃槃

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@khellang

khellang Jun 11, 2014

Author Member

Happy now? 馃槃

@damianh
Copy link
Member

damianh commented Jun 11, 2014

wtf travis lol

@grumpydev
Copy link
Member

grumpydev commented Jun 11, 2014

Travis build failed.. be good to see if any @NancyFx/most-valued-minions can restart it.

@grumpydev
Copy link
Member

grumpydev commented Jun 11, 2014

Come on then @NancyFx/most-valued-minions .. who's going to tag this against the milestone and push the magic button? ;)

@jchannon
Copy link
Member

jchannon commented Jun 11, 2014

I think @damianh has got his finger on the trigger

@damianh
Copy link
Member

damianh commented Jun 11, 2014

I am primed.

damianh added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2014
Move NancyOwinHost to core.
@damianh damianh merged commit b871628 into NancyFx:master Jun 11, 2014
1 check passed
1 check passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci The Travis CI build passed
Details
@phillip-haydon
Copy link
Member

phillip-haydon commented Jun 11, 2014

We need to roll this back, merge was bad, I didn't approve... Clearly this isn't a team effort...

@damianh
Copy link
Member

damianh commented Jun 11, 2014

It happened.

Image

@horsdal
Copy link
Member

horsdal commented Jun 11, 2014

馃懐 馃嵏

@khellang khellang deleted the khellang:owin branch Jun 11, 2014
@grumpydev grumpydev modified the milestones: 1.0 Alpha, 1.0 Feb 4, 2015
@khellang khellang restored the khellang:owin branch Feb 20, 2015
@khellang khellang deleted the khellang:owin branch Feb 20, 2015
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants
You can鈥檛 perform that action at this time.