Okay, now that I understand it, it is the same, yes.I'll start a new thread with thoughts about the whole topic
2009/8/11 Craig Neuwirt <cneuw...@gmail.com> > The original feature request for the WCF Facility was to not require > registering a client component for a WCF interface that is already defined > in the app.config/web.config via the system.serviceModel section. This > makes it nice and DRY to not have to indicate that you want a WCF Facility > managed proxy in two different places (web.config and castle config). All > the WCF Facility would do is hook into the lazy handler mechanism and > determine if the requested services is defined in the current configuration > file. If it is, it will automatically register the corresponding component > in the container using the existing WCF Configuration. This seems to be the > same scenario that MEF would use this hook for? > > > 2009/8/11 Ayende Rahien <aye...@ayende.com> > >> In that case, I don't understand it, do read the app.config to integrate >> with that? >> >> 2009/8/11 Craig Neuwirt <cneuw...@gmail.com> >> >> Hey guys, >>> Just returned from a quick vacation. I don't think WCF presents any >>> different scenario than MEF or any lazy discovery. WCF Facility would take >>> advantage of the same deferred resolution hook to provide WCF managed >>> proxies that were only defined in the standard system.serviceModel >>> configuration. >>> >>> 2009/8/11 Ayende Rahien <aye...@ayende.com> >>> >>> Okay,We have two distinct requests here. >>>> One is for WCF stuff, and as presented, it looks like life styles can >>>> resolve that. >>>> Second is for additional providers for handlers, for things like MEF, >>>> lazy component discovery, etc. >>>> Is this accruate? >>>> >>>> 2009/8/11 Krzysztof Koźmic <krzysztof.koz...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Agreed. (inline) >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > Argh, NO! >>>>> No, letting lazy handler provider, or whatever we call it decide >>>>> whether >>>>> it wants to register the handler in the container or not, should let >>>>> you >>>>> cover probably all the scenarios. >>>>> I say let's have _a_ way of implementing that, then we'll spike its >>>>> usage in WCF Facility (and if I find some time, I plan to do also MEF >>>>> integration that would require this as well) and see how that works, >>>>> and >>>>> what did we miss. Ay? >>>>> > >>>>> > If this is what you want, all you need to do is to write a custom >>>>> life >>>>> > cycle. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Users" group. To post to this group, send email to castle-project-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to castle-project-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
