Use Orleans with .NET Aspire

[ReubenBond]

Summary

First pass at Orleans + Aspire doc

Fixes #702
Fixes #808

Ideas for future improvement:

• Add section showing how to add multiple storage providers
• Add deployment section? Unsure it's needed
• Add section on extensibility: how to ensure that your Orleans providers work with .NET Aspire. The rough answer is that you add an assembly-wide Attribute and a config class to your provider library which understands how to read Config generated by Aspire and configure your provider with it.

---

Internal previews

📄 File	🔗 Preview link
docs/frameworks/orleans.md	Use Orleans with .NET Aspire

[IEvangelist]

This will need a TOC entry, and maybe even a hub page listing. Are the TODO's here indicating that this is a draft, or is it ready for review?

[ReubenBond]

The TODOs are future improvements - they're not needed for the first version

[davidfowl]

Probably doesn't belong under fundamentals. Maybe we have another top level section for framework integrations.

[ReubenBond]

@IEvangelist what are your thoughts on what the new section should be called? "Frameworks"? Perhaps SignalR should also be in the same section. Currently, it has its own section, Real-time communication.

[IEvangelist]

The TODOs are future improvements - they're not needed for the first version

Good to know, it's probably worth placing those inside the article as well as a comment so that we have it for later - we could even create an issue to track those improvements too. Use HTML comments in the MD:

<!--
Ideas for future improvement:

- Add section showing how to add multiple storage providers
- Add deployment section? Unsure it's needed
- Add section on extensibility: how to ensure that your Orleans providers work with .NET Aspire. The rough answer is that you add an assembly-wide attribute and a config class to your provider library which understands how to read config generated by .NET Aspire and configure your provider with it.
-->

[IEvangelist]

@IEvangelist what are your thoughts on what the new section should be called? "Frameworks"? Perhaps SignalR should also be in the same section. Currently, it has its own section, Real-time communication.

I like that, "Frameworks" as a new top-level node with those seems to fit nicely.

[IEvangelist]

This is a great start, several nits - and a few other suggestions!

[ReubenBond]

Since the SignalR page is specifically about Azure SignalR, maybe I should leave it where it is

[ReubenBond]

Ok, I think this is ready, @IEvangelist. Please take another look when you're available

[ReubenBond]

Thanks for getting this over the line, @IEvangelist!