Hi Mike,

Thanks for your response. Contrary to what I said to you a few months ago, I am currently working with C# / SQL server almost exclusively a the moment. Oh for the simplicity and productivity of Codemine <s>.

We have looked at the Wilson stuff - it looks good. There are many tools worthy of evaluation but its nice to get the nod from people you trust.

Thanks again,


>Hi Gary:
>I worked for a while with MM.Net. Though I've put that aside for the moment, when I was working with the product, I was using an ORM tool
>called WilsonDotNet which can be found at: http://www.wilsondotnet.com/.
>This product which began as a an implementation of the current at the time release ObjectSpaces specs has since continued on its own way while maintaining the API of ObjectSpaces. Kevin had begun a version of MM that supported this framework, but had to put it aside to follow some other priorities. But, the implementation was workable, and he might be convinced to pick it up again - if he hasn't already done so - since he has stated his intention to support ObjectSpaces.
>I can vouch for WilsonDotNet though which is a very solid piece of work, supported by a very responsive developer. And hey it only costs $50!
>You will also find that WilsonDotNet has some tools to assist in mapping the database - oh btw it supports other DB's besides MSSql. It also has some CodeSmith templates for code generation.
>
>Thanks for your help with VFP in the past. Hope this was helpful.
>Mike
>>Hi,
>>
>>I am currently tasked with evaluating .NET frameworks / Code generators for an enterprise scale development project.
>>
>>The current thinking of the C# team is that the framework or tool should support the "as yet to be officially released" ObjectSpaces.
>>
>>Is MM.Net likely to implement ObjectSpaces? If not, what approach will it take to object relational mapping (if any). How does the framework currently handle the relationship between data and its business objects?
>>
>>Any thoughts on this from existing MM users/developers would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>>Thanks,