Asp2.0 Assembly naming.

[Ashish]

Iam new to ASP.net 2.0 system of naming and compiling assemblies,

i was wondering if i could control the name and namespace of the
assembly and place it in the bin folder of the website (like the older
version does)

the reason is that iam creating some classes in the same project that i
would like to invoke through reflection .

tia

[Karl Seguin]

Yes, quite a pain, isn't it? :)

There's a deployment project available
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/re...p/default.aspx)
that'll let you specify the assembly name when deploying, but not when
building.

If your classes as located in App_Code, you should be able to reference them
like you normally would however..

Karl
--
MY ASP.Net tutorials
http://www.openmymind.net/
"Ashish" <as*****@thisisjunk.com> wrote in message
news:uR***************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

Iam new to ASP.net 2.0 system of naming and compiling assemblies,

i was wondering if i could control the name and namespace of the assembly
and place it in the bin folder of the website (like the older version
does)

the reason is that iam creating some classes in the same project that i
would like to invoke through reflection .

tia

[Ashish]

Well it is, this is a major shift although iam yet to understand what
are possible benefits of it,

can you think of possible benefits, on the other side providing
publishing support on developer's machine is a drawback and invitation
to abuse

Karl Seguin wrote:

Yes, quite a pain, isn't it? :)

There's a deployment project available
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/re...p/default.aspx)
that'll let you specify the assembly name when deploying, but not when
building.

If your classes as located in App_Code, you should be able to reference them
like you normally would however..

Karl

[Karl Seguin]

I believe the reason behind App_Code was to promote better design.
Developers were using codebehind classes for things that belonged in
separate classes,such as a business layer or even utility functionality.

The reason for creating separate assemblies is to provide greater
flexibility in updating and deployment. The new options are very useful to
a number of developers. I think the deployment project does a good job of
providing good options to the rest of us.

Karl

--
MY ASP.Net tutorials
http://www.openmymind.net/
"Ashish" <as*****@thisisjunk.com> wrote in message
news:O%*******************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Well it is, this is a major shift although iam yet to understand what are
possible benefits of it,

can you think of possible benefits, on the other side providing publishing
support on developer's machine is a drawback and invitation to abuse

Karl Seguin wrote:

Yes, quite a pain, isn't it? :)

There's a deployment project available
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/re...p/default.aspx)
that'll let you specify the assembly name when deploying, but not when
building.

If your classes as located in App_Code, you should be able to reference
them like you normally would however..

Karl