Apr 28, 2005 10:28 PM|kevin.weir|LINK
Cathal I just read Stevens blog and I disagree with some of his observations....
Naturally Enterprise Library is more complex particularity if you were targeting SQLHelper directly in the past. After all, you do have to pay a price if your design goal is portability. In my estimation the EL does a reasonable job of hiding complexity
once you overcome initial config issues and familiarize yourself with factory approach.
As for configuration issues I think they are overstating things. Sure config becomes more complex but after initial setup the config file should remain relatively static. Also the GUI configuration tools is not a requirement which the author seems to suggest.
The underlying config file is XML after all.
He does raise a good point about integration though... particularly when you consider DNN no longer uses Exception Application Block. I'm still disappointed this was removed from earlier version of DNN as it provided a very nice extensibility architecture.
In fact, I had written extensions that plugged seamlessly into this provider allowing me to selectively log exceptions to e-mail, Oracle, SQL Server and flat files with simple configuration changes.
Having said that, if we were to look at this issue more holistically the Enterprise library (or a similar framework) would provide an exceptional backbone for DNN that address database portability, caching, exception handling, logging, cryptography and so
on. For the vast majority of users who were satisfied with default implementation they would not have to concern themselves with such things. It would just work. For those of us who are more ambitious or require added flexibility the choices would be there.
Again, the biggest consideration here is simplifying the modules developers life. I'm hoping I have some time this weekend to start working on a prototype that I can share with others. I also look forward to seeing what others come up with.