yes it will, however so will using different version of the same package, especially if the projects have relations with each-other. you should fix version mismatches it can give headaches later on.

nuget package manager, at solution level gives warnings when you have mismatches which is enough for me tbh, nevertheless this can be helpfull in keeping things clean. downside is when adding a new package you will need to manually add it to the buildprops file.

@@Anno_NymousI think VS as well as Rider do detect/support central package management and they will add it accordingly.

Kind of. You can manage nuget packages at the solution level. It will tell you which version is installed in each project and allow you to install/update accordingly.

@sweeperq yes, but its another feature. I was asking about the feature presented in the vídeo.

Yes, go to tools > nuget package manager > manage package for solution. here you have your central package managment. you can see all your packages, see what is the latest version, see if there are updates, see if packages are deprecated, etc etc. It's the industry standard, and yes also for large projects. it warns you for if you have different versions for the same package across projects, the managepackeversioncentrally just uses 1 file with the version and packages for all files (so you wont get version mismatches)

@@thomasvlima no, you have to add the new file, name it add the projects. end edit all project files.after that you can use nuget package managment as normal, however adding a new package need manual editing again. so it does add complexity.

@@chenz2584 Yes

Thats not the same

@@Code_Bits sometimes you need the same package in multiple project of the solution, this will prevent have for instance version 2.1.1 of a package in project A, while having 2.1.3 in project B for example.

If you have 5 projects, you can make sure all those projects have the same version of a package.

Managing package versions in one place - works really nice for large projects

Does that props file have to be located in the same solution? If i have multiple repos with multiple solutions, what then?

No more consolidating packages

@@edgarskurpnieks476 Can be solution level, or folder level. I think this is meant for a single solution, but you could share it if you import the same props file in all solutions.

I tend not to compose commands. Rather, I publish an event and handle the second command in the background

I think your approach is pretty sane. The difference is failing fast, I guess. When doing some validation in the use case, we may end up performing some network trips before realizing we have invalid data (unless all preconditions can be checked first, in which case it's equal).

Good point!

Mhm, exploring this some more

I think you're right about FusionCache. Didn't do a performance comparison

I think they solve different problems. So the question is which problem are you trying to solve?

@MilanJovanovicTech if I want to stick to DDD, how to incorporate FluentValidator?

I'd have to do some reflection magic to make this work in a middleware, so I decided not to explore this approach

Don't think so. Up to you. But where will you check for null?

The relation is between role and permissions, not users and permissions. We'd need a different data model for what you're describing.

Had us in the first half

Currently, all code is shared here: www.patreon.com/milanjovanovic

Glad to be of service

ReSharper

@ Thanks

Is Ngrok a cloud service now only?

Onion/hexagonal are just as "layered" as anything else. What do you mean by "pure class" in the context of your last sentence? What can a class with no dependencies do within the scope of the system?

@MilanJovanovicTech I mean a class without side-effects: no input/output what-so-ever, only pure logic. Eg: service reads a list of transactions from repository, passes it to the pure class, that in turns return the tax amount for each of them. The service may enrich this tax list with more details from another repository and then pass it to the controller, that will wrap it into an http response

They're on the same level, so it's fine. Plus, you need to wire up DI somehow.

Yeah, I guess lots of folks didn't know about InlineValidator

Currently, all code is shared here: www.patreon.com/milanjovanovic

The disadvantage with that is you need your team to know what they're doing (go figure). Otherwise, it tends to become a mess over time.

No idea

@@ZubriQue I think you're better of without fluent validation. You have more power the way you do it. The declarative style of fluent validation is a weakness imo.

How much more performant is your solution? This would fall under micro-optimizations

Nah

Još uvek naiđem na konkatenciju tu i tamo

You check if the server returns a 401 response

Agree

I see. Makes sense. I rarely have a big block of variables next to each other, so it never really bothered me.

You're free not to use them. What have you contributed to the .NET ecosystem?

@MilanJovanovicTech They are dragged into many projects that I work on. I don't always have a say. I've not contributed much at all, and what I have contributed is not much appreciated! 😅 That doesn't make fluent validation any better though! I think validation of input (that is mostly made up of primitive values) should output strongly typed value objects. I've made my own system for this, but of course, only I myself is using it. :)

I share all the code here: www.patreon.com/milanjovanovic

You're welcome!