[Bug?] Possible issue with receiver class.

Dec 9, 2009 at 3:28 PM


I'm writting this notice to report a (possible) issue that I have experience while working with SPVisualDev. I dont't know if it should be considered a bug, a limit of the current version or simply a false issue caused by a missunderstaning of the configuration settings of the artifact project.


Basically the problem is this:  under certain circumstance, SPVisualDev triggers a strange behaviour while working with feature.xml files and feature receiver and automatically updates the current setting with incorrect data. I work on a solution where the feature receiver classes are placed in a different project than the artifac project: every time i install a feature with an event receiver from the ide (but i saw the same issue happening on a wsp build) SPVisualDev tries to update the feaute.xml file and replaces the ReceiverClass and ReceiverAssembly setting with some "random" namespaces (seems to be the namespace used by the artifact project).
No need to say that this anomaly leed to problems when you try to activate the feature form SharePoint (a nice "Failure creatin the feature reciver object" if I recall well)...

The funny part  is that if you have the luck to work source controlled you can simply workaround the problem by dismissing the file checkout prompt on the feature.xml file - the setting will remain untouched and all will work as expected.


I'm writting this here (and not in the issue section) because I dont know if this issue while dangerous could be considered a bug or it is a limit of the current version, so i'm hoping to bring some light - maybee someone else has experienced this? It would be usefull if Tore could also confirm if having a feature receiver class ina a different project is supported (or if we should configure something with the default feature namespaces??) - just to know if it 's worty to make some other test or it's better to leave this issue alone for now.

Thanks again for your tool - will try to see if i discover something else and report here any new discovery.

Dec 11, 2009 at 11:57 AM
This discussion has been copied to a work item. Click here to go to the work item and continue the discussion.