|
I've been using it for four years. I've introduced it to 3 different teams who were all still developing services the hard way (creating a windows service installer project then attaching to the service and debugging).
1) it makes it easy to install your service, just "[yourservice].exe -install" and it's very configurable.
2) it makes it easy to develop against. We have multiple service projects in our solution. We just set up debugging to start all the relevant services at once. Hit F5 and they are all running - no install needed. To be fair a lot of places do this w/o TopShelf, but why re-invent the wheel?
3) supports transactional installs (install fails you can create rollback steps)
4) supports service recovery (actions to take on first, second and third service failure: restart service, run a program or restart computer)
5) It would easily support hosting multiple services, but you'd have to provide that yourself - there's nothing stopping you, it just isn't out of the box. At a couple places I've written a single host console that will boostrap and host any dll as a service as long as there's a class that implements the interface I'm looking for. Modifying it to host multiple services would be pretty simple I assume.
It really is a fantastic open source project and its free so complaining about the website and docs is really just nit-picking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
- For simplicity without writing install scripts.
- For easy starting and stopping form the command line.
- For very easy logic to create a service, add all the configuration in one place. (name, restart, user configuration).
- For easy debugging as a console application.
- For easy integration to Dependency Injection.
- For easy trapping of fatal errors in your service with a simple try catch around the top shelf process.
It is definitely the easiest way to write services that I know of.
|
|
|
|
|
Note that I have never used Windows Live Mail and Google has loaded me with millions of hits that turn out to be Windows Mail as opposed to Windows Live Mail.
One of my jobs tomorrow is for a customer that is unable to send emails from Windows Live Mail but is able to receive. The job description also mentions unable to get an SSL connection but the last 3 weeks I have been working through this company has proven that the Help Desk is not able to give a decent description of what I am heading into.
I know I will get on site and see and error message that will give me the answer, but just in case it isn't that straight forward I'm looking for some advanced help.
Anyone have any experience with or links to supporting Windows Live Mail configuration or using problems?
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
My condolences, I hope you will get better in a few day s time...
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried searching for "Windows Live Mail" in quotes along with whatever search terms you wish. For example, a search for <"Windows Live Mail" can receive cannot send"> seems to produce relevant hits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This may be a bit late, but outside of an actual network issue such as a blocked port the connection details for live servers are;
Incoming Server: pop3.live.com
Outgoing Server: smtp.live.com
Incoming Port (POP3): 995
Outgoing Port (SMTP): 587
Make sure that "My outgoing server (SMTP) requires authentication" and "This server requires an encrypted conection" is ticked.
Encryption type: TLS
People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it's safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs
|
|
|
|
|
Rod Kemp wrote: This may be a bit late, but outside of an actual network issue such as a blocked port the connection details for live servers are;
Incoming Server: pop3.live.com
Outgoing Server: smtp.live.com
Incoming Port (POP3): 995
Outgoing Port (SMTP): 587
Make sure that "My outgoing server (SMTP) requires authentication" and "This server requires an encrypted conection" is ticked.
Encryption type: TLS
Thanks, found all this while on site. She had ports 110 and 25, turned out I needed port 465 for SMTP.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
This is so cool[^] (no pun intended!)
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-----
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-----
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
Just stand next to the refrigerator and ask your friend to open it as fast as he can... 
|
|
|
|
|
That would give just the inverse result... 
|
|
|
|
|
You mean he will be flattened?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
So open the freezer, stand in front of it and get your mate to slam the door.
Honestly, do I have to think of everything?
Never underestimate the power of stupid things in large numbers
--- Serious Sam
|
|
|
|
|
|
does it come in "Princess Leia" gold model ?
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, I tried those steps, and they worked, but, there is always a but, the LAN devices (computers, tv's,...) were not capable to get Access to LAN computers shared networks and similar, only to Internet... 
|
|
|
|
|
Did you check it was on the same domain/workgroup name?
Never underestimate the power of stupid things in large numbers
--- Serious Sam
|
|
|
|
|
I've just tested it at home (the tests made where at my inlaws) and here it Works... 
I'll have to recheck it at their house...
In both emplacements I've connected the LINKSYS device into a switch that is connected to a router.
I'll try it again...
Thank you for your comments OG!
|
|
|
|
|
I liked the movie.
Really liked it.
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed. Danny Kaye plays Walter Mitty with comedic genius..
|
|
|
|
|
Well I was obviously looking at the new movie.
The old one might have been good too.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
(at least not in spain under Windows 7 and ie11 or chrome).