[GH-ISSUE #130] Common classes #65

Closed
opened 2026-02-27 15:48:34 +03:00 by kerem · 7 comments
Owner

Originally created by @tidusjar on GitHub (May 14, 2015).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/quasar/Quasar/issues/130

Hi,

I have a question why we are duplicating work?
There seems to be a few 'common' classes in the solution where they are duplicated in both projects. e.g. encryption. Why do we not have a 'Common' Project with these classes in that the other projects just reference?

Originally created by @tidusjar on GitHub (May 14, 2015). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/quasar/Quasar/issues/130 Hi, I have a question why we are duplicating work? There seems to be a few 'common' classes in the solution where they are duplicated in both projects. e.g. encryption. Why do we not have a 'Common' Project with these classes in that the other projects just reference?
kerem 2026-02-27 15:48:34 +03:00
  • closed this issue
  • added the
    question
    label
Author
Owner

@MaxXor commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015):

I want the client to have no dependencies except the default ones from the .net framework.

<!-- gh-comment-id:101970936 --> @MaxXor commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015): I want the client to have no dependencies except the default ones from the .net framework.
Author
Owner

@tidusjar commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015):

Why can't we have a dependency on our own controlled, small library? I'm just thinking it would help out with the project structure and maintainability.

<!-- gh-comment-id:101971266 --> @tidusjar commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015): Why can't we have a dependency on our own controlled, small library? I'm just thinking it would help out with the project structure and maintainability.
Author
Owner

@yankejustin commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015):

@MaxXor I think you may have misunderstood @tidusjar
If I am understanding correctly, tidusjar is suggesting that we move code that is the same for the server and the client (for example: protobuf) to another project and have the server and use the same project so we don't have to make a change to the server or client, then reflect the change to the other project. Doing this would mean we only have to change one and it would be unnecessary to require a duplicate change in the other project.

<!-- gh-comment-id:102108161 --> @yankejustin commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015): @MaxXor I think you may have misunderstood @tidusjar If I am understanding correctly, tidusjar is suggesting that we move code that is the same for the server and the client (for example: protobuf) to another project and have the server and use the same project so we don't have to make a change to the server or client, then reflect the change to the other project. Doing this would mean we only have to change one and it would be unnecessary to require a duplicate change in the other project.
Author
Owner

@tidusjar commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015):

@yankejustin Correct. We would then only make the change in one location and it would be consistent across the server and client. But it would require 1 more .DLL

<!-- gh-comment-id:102109130 --> @tidusjar commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015): @yankejustin Correct. We would then only make the change in one location and it would be consistent across the server and client. But it would require 1 more .DLL
Author
Owner

@MaxXor commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015):

@tidusjar and I don't allow this one more DLL, sorry.

<!-- gh-comment-id:102196716 --> @MaxXor commented on GitHub (May 14, 2015): @tidusjar and I don't allow this one more DLL, sorry.
Author
Owner

@rabbitsmith commented on GitHub (May 25, 2015):

@MaxXor i think this is feasible.we can use ilmerge to combine the protobuf dll , encryption dll and client.exe after compiling them. simply search in google for ilmerge.exe.

<!-- gh-comment-id:105141185 --> @rabbitsmith commented on GitHub (May 25, 2015): @MaxXor i think this is feasible.we can use ilmerge to combine the protobuf dll , encryption dll and client.exe after compiling them. simply search in google for ilmerge.exe.
Author
Owner

@rabbitsmith commented on GitHub (May 25, 2015):

we can merge mono.cecil with xrat.exe

<!-- gh-comment-id:105141261 --> @rabbitsmith commented on GitHub (May 25, 2015): we can merge mono.cecil with xrat.exe
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
starred/Quasar#65
No description provided.