Friday, February 17, 2012

Mapping-by-Code & Fluent NHibernate issues summary

In my mapping-by-code posts series I've just completed, I reviewed the capabilities of both mapping-by-code and Fluent NHibernate in comparison to plain old XML mappings. There are some more or less serious bugs on both sides, as well as both solutions don't offer everything XML does. In each case, when I found the issue worth mentioning, I was looking if it was already reported and reported it myself if not. Here is the quick summary:

Mapping-by-Code

Fluent NHibernate


As you can see, the number of issues I've encountered is very similiar for both mapping-by-code and Fluent NHibernate. For mapping-by-code, majority of them were already reported and actions were taken. Actually, 5 of them are already resolved and wait for NH 3.3 release. I've reported 3 new issues (one of which was fixed in few days) and extended another one.

For Fluent NHibernate, I've reported 8 issues out of 10 encountered. Sadly, by now, none of them were even commented. It looks like there's no active development on FNH. I tend to agree that leaving issues in no man's land with no status at all is a sign of a neglected community. I'd prefer to have these issues closed with "won't do" status than ignored, for sure.

2 comments:

  1. Sadly, you are correct that FNH development is currently languishing. In the FNH Google Group topic

    http://groups.google.com/group/fluent-nhibernate/browse_thread/thread/aa16eb4211417611?hl=en#

    I commented:

    "The big problem in FNH land these days is that nobody is actively maintaining it. James Gregory has had to step back for personal reasons, and no one else is filling the vacuum."

    Some of us are trying to rectify this situation - maybe we can get things moving again.

    Also, see the first posting, which describes a fairly unhappy experience with NH MbC.

    -Tom Bushell

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, that's of course true that FNH is more mature and far better documented. And unhappy experiences with MBC don't surprise me. Mine was not better at the very beginning, maybe I was just more patient :)

      But for me, MBC, with its cleaner API design, better maintenance and tight coupling to NHibernate is the future for mapping.

      Anyway, keep up the good work on FNH, it's always better to have a choice :)

      Delete