1

I have a very large website which was "published" using Visual Studio 2008 to the dev/live server. As a result, there are no *.aspx.cs files on the live server, just "website.dll" - all good so far.

However, because we're constantly having to add pages to the site this now means that if I'm half way through developing a big part of the site when I'm required to make a small change elsewhere, I can't publish "website.dll" to the live site because it has all my half finished code in there. How do people deal with this situation?

If I could split the site up into multiple dlls (perhaps based on namespace?) then I could just publish the small part of the site that's changed, leaving the bit I'm still developing on the dev server.

Thanks,

B

Ben
  • 11
  • 2

3 Answers3

5

Your problem is not the single assembly, but your way of developing.

To cope with this problem I would introduce a source control system (svn, git, ...) in your environment. These allow you to use branches, you could create 2 branches. One for new development and one for bugfixes or small changes.

These can later be merged to create a new release.

More info can be found here or here and in the manuals of Subversion, Git and other source control systems.

Community
  • 1
  • 1
Jochen
  • 1,488
  • 16
  • 21
  • I'd like to make an addition. Use a strategy where you maintain a stable trunk (just bugfix here), branches for projects where you add new stuff, and branches/tags for releases. Reintegrate branches after a project is finished, and reintegrate release branches before you do a new release. – Jan Jongboom Dec 16 '09 at 09:46
0

No, you can't.

Split your project in several sub-projects and handle them in a solution. Every project will become a seperate DLL.

Maximilian Mayerl
  • 11,253
  • 2
  • 33
  • 40
0

Use source control. We use subversion with ahnk+tortoise. subversion on wikip

gingerbreadboy
  • 7,386
  • 5
  • 36
  • 62