Sure. I will also be doing some work on facility soon, and probably will
make a release.

Tuna Toksöz
Eternal sunshine of the open source mind.

http://devlicio.us/blogs/tuna_toksoz
http://tunatoksoz.com
http://twitter.com/tehlike




On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Germán Schuager <[email protected]> wrote:

> Programatic configuration would be ok too, but that would imply more
> implementation work and a change in the way that most of us are configuring
> the facility.
>
> The ideas that I've mention are not specifically about programatic
> configuration, they are more general (things like support for CpBT, usage of
> ISessionFactory.GetCurrentSession instead of ISessionManager.OpenSession,
> etc) and don't know if they apply to this facility or to a new one. Anyway,
> I'm working on this in my spare time and when/if I arrive to something
> functional I will tell you to review it (if you are interested, of course)
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Tuna Toksoz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> INhibernateFacilityEventRegistry would be a better name, but i still
>> prefer programatic configuration.
>> What do you think about programatic configuration?
>>
>>
>> Tuna Toksöz
>> Eternal sunshine of the open source mind.
>>
>> http://devlicio.us/blogs/tuna_toksoz
>> http://tunatoksoz.com
>> http://twitter.com/tehlike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>   On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Germán Schuager <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> The facility is not registered itself in the container.
>>>
>>> I've taken a look at the code and found 2 ways to implement this without
>>> too much trouble:
>>>
>>> 1) configuration option for a custom activator and inherit from
>>> SessionFactoryActivator in user code.
>>>
>>> 2) use the same approach as with IConfigurationContributor: look for a
>>> INHFacilityEvents (awfull name) in the container and use it wherever we
>>> need.
>>>
>>> I like option 2.
>>>
>>>
>>> PD: before starting the work in programatic configuration I'd like to
>>> comment you a few ideas that I've been working on.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Tuna Toksoz <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hmm, you're putting more and more ideas into play ;). I was thinking
>>>> about events but don't like to have the event stuff in XML, so this looks
>>>> like it is better to wait for the programatic configuration of the 
>>>> facility.
>>>> BTW, I haven't ever tried but can we resolve/retrieve the Facility from
>>>> the container?
>>>>
>>>> Tuna Toksöz
>>>> Eternal sunshine of the open source mind.
>>>>
>>>> http://devlicio.us/blogs/tuna_toksoz
>>>> http://tunatoksoz.com
>>>> http://twitter.com/tehlike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Germán Schuager <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ISessionFactory
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Castle Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to