Support for producing "Sources" package.

[dazinator]

Currently, the install package produced does not contain source code files.

There should be the option to also produce a sources version of the install package.

This can work in exactly the same way as in it would include everything the regular install package includes, but it would also need to include source code files - which is currently any file in the project with one of the following extensions:

1. cs
2. vb

[david-poindexter]

Agreed. Thanks for adding this issue. You beat us to the punch! ;-)

[david-poindexter]

Oh, you'll also need to consider adding the following:

• sln
• csproj
• vbproj
• targets
• xml
• nupkg
• xsd
• proj
• ps1
• psm1

There may be others, but these were some off the top of my head.

[dazinator]

Ok - cheers. I'll look to include these by default, and allow this list to be overriden.
I guess I should also include any project item with a build action set to "compile".

[dazinator]

This is currently waiting on #15 to be finished and merged back to master, before I can start on this issue.

[david-poindexter]

Awesome - thanks!

[david-poindexter]

@dazinator how is this one coming along?

[dazinator]

Have been sidetracked by the project system work im doing for a while, but I'll try and pick this one up over the next couple of weeks!

[david-poindexter]

Okay, I have a presentation for DNNCon Baltimore 2016 that is built around using DnnPackager and would love for this to be available before then. If not, no biggie. I just know it will be something I'm asked about and may be perceived by many as a barrier for using DnnPackager.

[dazinator]

Ok yeah good thinking. I'll try to get this out before then if possible.

[david-poindexter]

Thanks!

[dazinator]

Just wondering.. if there is an example of a sources zip somewhere.I can't remember whether it's meant to also contain all the things an install zip contains such as assemblies and pdb's etc - or should it just contain source files only?

[dazinator]

And also, I'm wondering if the source files should be put in a seperate folder inside the zip, i.e like a "source" folder, or perhaps be an additional resource zip inside the zip? I guess I need some examples of these source packages

[dazinator]

This seems to mention that the source is included as a resources zip inside the zip: http://www.dnnsoftware.com/forums/threadid/16719/scope/posts/is-the-source-zip-correct

[dazinator]

Ok think I have got my head around this now.

[dazinator]

I'm not sure it makes sense to include the .csproj file in the sources zip package. You may have project items in your project that you do not wish to be distributed in the zip package. The project file may also be referencing build targets, or have project references, nuget package references etc for things that you don't include inside the zip package. Therefore if you just include the .csproj file as is inside the sources zip, theres a good chance that people won't be able to open this project file "as is" once extracted from the sources zip - as there may be missing files, missing project references, missing nuget packages, missing targets files etc etc.. Does anyone actually do this?

[david-poindexter]

Please review https://github.com/ChrisHammond/DNNTemplates/blob/master/VSIX/CSharp-DAL2-Template/BuildScripts/ModulePackage.targets - this is what people expect.

[dazinator]

Thanks @nvisionative. I need to understand more fully about the reasoning behind these sources packages, as I don't just want to blindly copy Chris Hammond. From what I can currently see, the sources packages are way to install a module into a dnn site, but also include the code behind files etc, so that for modules that use Dynamic Compilation in IIS, people can essentially go into the folder (on disk) modify some code directly in a website folder where the module is installed, and then the site will restart, the module will be dynamically compiled, and the changes will be reflected on the site. This is completely different from distributing a VS solution to VS developers that will build, compile, run etc. Therefore at the moment I can't see any benefit to including a csproj file or sln file in the "sources" package..

[david-poindexter]

By the way, that 2006 forum post you referenced was related more to someone trying to find the source code for an old core module (DNN Store) - not how Source install packages should be built. Chris Hammond's module templates are the de facto standard.

[dazinator]

I hav epretty much completed this feature, but for now i'm not including csproj, or sln files as I believe that to be correct, even though Chris Hammonds stuff does include them, I don't think it's a good idea for the present!

[david-poindexter]

That all depends on the compilation method chosen by the developer. I definitely believe you should follow Chris' lead on this.

[dazinator]

Thanks @nvisionative I do appreciate and value your advice on this, but I'll have to address including the csproj, sln files as a seperate issue. I personally think it's a mistake and I'd love to see any example of this working or being used successfully to distribute projects / solutions to developers. I personally think what would happen is someone would go to open the csproj file / sln file and hit multiple issues that they'd have to fix before they could use it in VS..

[dazinator]

I have blogged about this stuff here if interested: http://darrelltunnell.net/blog/2016/03/19/dnn-extensions-sources-packages-what-are-they/