No, not mine, but this one.  http://nickgrattan.wordpress.com.  There is lots of useful material here on many SharePoint topics.

Does anyone have a list of quality SharePoint blogs?  Maybe I'll start one here...

When deploying a solution to a site you can sometimes get errors that are not picked up during compilation.  For example, we created a Content Type that contained a field with an inccorrect BaseType of "Person" rather than "User".  This compiled just fine but fails on the first deploy.  It then failed to compile after deploying.

To fix this is easy enough - remember to update the content type xml as well as the generated schema.xml - but Visual Studio can get it's nickers in a knot and will not be able to deploy the corrected solution.

You need to manually remove the solution using the setup.bat that is created during deployment. Run setup.bat from the bin\debug or bin\release folder thus: 

    setup /u

Then IISReset.

If you try to redeploy with Visual Studio you may now get an error that talks about an "invariant language"  - sorry, I didn't save this error message when it happened.  You will need to restart Visual Studio to clear this error.

I'm in lovely sunny Wellington this week working on some WSS samples using the Visual Studio Extensions for Windows SharePoint Services 1.1 (or more easily pronounced VissyWiss).  One of the samples requires the use of a Module Project Item.  There is surprisingly little documentation - official or otherwise - on what a module does and how to use it - at least, not that we can find.  So, here's my contribution - hopefully correct.

A Module Project Item is used to deploy files to any(?) part of your WSS installation.  You specify the source of the item to copy as a file path relative to the module, and the destination as a url path relative to the site root.  This all sounds very simple, but the problem is that there are 2 urls and 2 paths so there are several permitations possible and not all of them work!

When you add a Module Project Item to your project (Site def, Empty def etc) you will get an XML file called Module.xml in a folder.  Our one looks like this:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Elements Id="b43cb805-eebf-421a-83d3-c2a6cb8afa10" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/">
  <Module Name="module_training" Url="images">
    <File Url="WORD_icon.jpg" Path="module_training\WORD_icon.jpg" Type="Ghostable" />
  </Module>
</Elements>


Module Url: This is where the files will be copied to.  The url is relative to the site root.
File Path: Path to the file relative to the project in Visual Studio.
File Type: This can only be Ghostable or GhostableInLibrary.  You can only use GhostableInLibrary if the module Url is for a List, such as Shared Documents.

<Module> also has a Path attribute but we dont need it for this operation.

The module will create folders if they dont exist so in the above example we are copying an image to the root images folder, but this could easily be "customimages" and the folder will be created.

There's more to Modules but that is all I have for now.  I'll update when I know how to do Wildcards :)

Rod is a frequent poster on the subject of broadcast TV. I agree totally with his latest comments and suggestions, but I'd just like to add my little bit.

I dont have an AppleTV or an iPod or iTunes stuff but I do have a Media capable PC connected to a 42" LCD TV.  I dont use Media Center as a) I dont have TV tuners in the PC and b) there are no guides for TV programmes (yes you can hack it but Ive tried and got too frustrated) and c) Media Center just gets in the way when your downloading stuff - you still have to revert to Windows Explorer and a browser.

I also dont like the idea of paying for TV so I dont have Sky (plus all the repeat screenings and self promotion drive me nuts). 

However, I do pay for RapidShare which is were I get all my downloads from. Yes, this a moral disgrace and while I can't legally justify it, in my defence I would like to say that I mostly download TV shows that are (or one day might be :) free to air in New Zealand.  I also don't give away stuff I've downloaded - at least not too often, maybe 10%.

So, it occurs to me that if TV NZ, or whoever has the balls, wants to charge a reasonable amount for access to full legal ondemand TV then I'd probably sign up.  I might even consider tollerating a few advertisements - like 1 per half hour.  And they should also have a great selection of program - not the usual crap that passes as quality TV (CSI, Boston Legal, Lost etv (OMG dont get me started)).

Of course 'reasonable amount' is a very subjective term. For me this would have to be a lot less than Sky but could be more than RapidShare - say $15 or $20 a month.  I think this is very unlikely in over priced New Zealand so I'll continue to infringe copyright until broadcast TV dies and/or I run out of disk space or bandwidth.

Today I received a correction to a post I did on SharePoint last year.  My erroneous statement was causing a few queries to be sent to Microsoft.  For this I am truly sorry, but in my defense I did check my facts first - like all good reporters I blame my sources!

Anyway, that got me thinking about correcting blog posts.  I've seen debate about this in the past and my philosophy has always been:

• correct only factual errors but leave the original text intact
• never delete a blog post unless under court order
• be careful what you say BEFORE you post

My temper and inpatients often get me into trouble so there are a few blog posts here that I could remove or edit, yet, I wont.  Better to see me warts and all I think. 

What do you thnk?

Microsoft have just release v 1.1 of the Visual Studio Extensions for WSS - VSEWSS.  These work with Visual Studio 2005 and offer a few enhancements of the 1.0 release.  There will be another release mid year that will add support for VS08.

WSS dev is a huge hairy beast and it can be hard to get started - or even figuring out where to start. The best part about new release is the user guide that is provided with VSEWSS.  This is something that some clever chaps at Intergen have been working on.  I provided some very minimal input reviewing their work which is basically providing me with some free training in exchange for fixing a few typos!  The user guide will improve over the next few months as we add more sections so keep checking for updates.

Get it here:

VSeWSS 1.1

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=3E1DCCCD-1CCA-433A-BB4D-97B96BF7AB63&displaylang=en

 

User Guide

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=a8a4e775-074d-4451-be39-459921f79787&DisplayLang=en

Lately, I often find myself repeating a little mantra:

   Keep it simple
   Keep it simple
   Keep it simple

   Ohhhhmmmmmmmmm.

This usually happens when it's too late, when I'm bogged down 5 layers deep in SQL or CAML, when Ive spent 3 hours googling for a solution to a problem and only found half answers in Polish.

Some observations:

• Complexity is often the result of too much simplicity.
• Too much abstraction moves you away from a solution.
• Everyone is busy.
• You can't polish a turd.

I'm working towards a point here so stick with me. I'll be more specific.  SharePoint.

SharePoint is big.  Really big.  "So big that you can't even imagine it" big.  It's not bad, just big.  Big things tend to be more complex.  Complex is harder.  Harder takes longer and therefore costs more.

At the other end of the scale is NotePad. Anyone who can use a computer should be able to use NotePad.  It's functional, uncomplicated, stable(?) and I think elegant.

Here's some more observations:

• The world is a complex place. It's full of complex human beings.
• Business often needs solutions for humans.  These tend to be complex too. SharePoint is designed to solve complex solutions.  I'm not going to use NotePad for anything other than to edit a occasional text file.
• Clarity can only be acheived when all solutions are explored.
• Complexity and Simplicity are relative and not mutually exclusive.

My point is this.  We should not be scared of complexity.  Simlicity is an admirable goal but not when its at the cost of solving a problem.  We need a way of managing and dealing with complexity.  I'm sure there are many people much smarter than I devoting themselves to exactly this problem, but here is my small contribution.

1. Avoid complexity but don't be afraid of it.
2. Compartmentalise complex solutions into managable chuncks.
3. Focus what is infront of you. 
4. Be patient but follow the 20 minute rule (see below).
5. The next version will always be better but the previous version is often good enough.

My 20 Minute Rule

You can adjust the time up or down to suit, but my 20 minute rule is this:  If I can't figure out how to use/do something in 20 minutes - without a manual  - then it's too hard or complex.

This doesn't mean I give up, it just means I need to learn more before attempting it again.

If you are a regular reader of my blog - and I think there is still one person - Hi Mum! - then you will have noticed that my blogging frequency and quality has been very low for quite a while.  The truth is I have lost some enthusiasm to blog.  I've often started to write blogs and think "what a load of twaddle" and hit cancel.

My choices are to continue on drip feeding or pull finger and start writing about something useful.  My ego still enjoys seeing my face and words on the Internet so there is not way I'd pull this site :)  The only sensible thing left to do is commit to doing some regular posting.

So, to that end, I hearby declare my intention to post at least twice a week.  Topics will include anything I'm working on - Sharepoint, EPiServer, general .Net, SQL etc - community activity - user groups etc - and an occassional option or rant about something that gets me wound up - which is pretty easy to do.

If you are a regular reader (Hi Mum!!) and you noitce me slipping again, please feel free to remind me of my pledge or publically humiliate me in some non-photoshop way.

Now... off to do my first one.