using TC library API library wrapper...

[RaphHaddad]

..rather than dynamic magic calls without static classes.

What do you guys think of something like this?

http://github.com/stack72/TeamCitySharp

It would make it easier to adapt the project for extra and more complicated options

[pawelpabich]

Anything strongly typed gets my +1 :)

[tathamoddie]

Under the covers, it's still going over HTTP. It is always loosely typed somewhere in the chain. Adding a dependency on TeamCitySharp is just hiding the loose typing somewhere further down the stack.

[pawelpabich]

There is always a schema :), either explicit (e.g. a client library) or implicit (directly in the code). I see it We use strongly typed View Models in MVC because parsing HTTP is not where we want to spent our time.

[tathamoddie]

The related PR, #19, contains 0 changes to HTTP parsing logic whilst still implementing new behavior. It is existing, working code. What's the value of changing it?

[pawelpabich]

You are right the code works just fine. I will let @RaphHaddad explain his own reasons.

From my perspective it is about the cost of maintenance. When I wanted to extend TeamFlash I had to check TC docs + run the app to know how certain information flows from the server to the code. With strongly typed client this work is done for me by the compiler.

[RaphHaddad]

In addition to @pawelpabich comments.

I believe that if we want to add features like excluding/including projects and branches etc, it would be wise to have some statically typed classes. A bit of magic is OK. Too much isn't. :P

I understand your concern @tathamoddie in terms of the TC API being loosely typed down the chain. However, having that first level of the chain defined as a schema helps a lot.