Why MonadicSharp.Framework?
MonadicSharp.Framework is a meta-package that installs all six infrastructure packages in one step. This page helps you decide whether to use it or install packages individually.
What the meta-package installs
dotnet add package MonadicSharp.FrameworkThis single command adds:
MonadicSharp.Framework.AgentsMonadicSharp.Framework.SecurityMonadicSharp.Framework.TelemetryMonadicSharp.Framework.HttpMonadicSharp.Framework.PersistenceMonadicSharp.Framework.Caching
All packages depend only on MonadicSharp core. They are independent of each other at the assembly level.
When the meta-package makes sense
New projects starting from scratch. You do not know yet which packages you will use. The meta-package lets you start building without spending time on dependency decisions.
Proof-of-concept work. Speed matters more than bundle size. Install everything, explore, then trim later.
Teams new to Railway-Oriented Programming. Having all packages available from day one reduces the friction of discovering patterns incrementally. Developers can read any part of the framework documentation without needing a separate install step.
Internal services where deployment size is not a constraint. Long-running .NET workers and ASP.NET APIs rarely benefit from removing a few hundred KB of framework assemblies.
When individual packages are better
Minimal APIs and single-responsibility services. A service that only makes outbound HTTP calls and caches results needs Http and Caching. Adding Agents, Security, and Persistence adds code you will never use.
Strict dependency auditing. Some organizations review every transitive dependency. Using individual packages keeps the graph minimal and explicit.
Incremental adoption in an existing codebase. Introducing ROP to an existing project works better one layer at a time. Start with Http to replace HttpClient try/catch blocks, then add Persistence when you refactor the data layer.
Serverless and trimmed deployments. Native AOT and dotnet publish --sc with size trimming benefit from smaller reference sets.
Comparison
| Scenario | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| New greenfield project | MonadicSharp.Framework (meta-package) |
| Proof of concept / prototype | MonadicSharp.Framework (meta-package) |
| Team unfamiliar with ROP | MonadicSharp.Framework (meta-package) |
| Only need HTTP + Caching | Individual packages |
| Minimal API / trimmed publish | Individual packages |
| Incremental adoption in legacy codebase | Individual packages |
| Strict transitive dependency policy | Individual packages |
| Internal long-running service | Either — no meaningful difference |
Mixing approaches
You can start with the meta-package and later replace it with explicit individual references without any code changes. The meta-package adds no types of its own; it is purely a dependency bundle.
<!-- Before: single reference -->
<PackageReference Include="MonadicSharp.Framework" Version="1.*" />
<!-- After: only what you use -->
<PackageReference Include="MonadicSharp.Framework.Agents" Version="1.*" />
<PackageReference Include="MonadicSharp.Framework.Http" Version="1.*" />
<PackageReference Include="MonadicSharp.Framework.Caching" Version="1.*" />Both forms are compatible. No API surface changes.