It's only the WebLogger right?

+0

Cheers,
Henry Conceição



On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 8:36 AM, Craig Neuwirt <[email protected]> wrote:
> +0
>
> On Sep 10, 2010, at 6:20 AM, Krzysztof Koźmic wrote:
>
>> ok, what do other committers think about this?
>>
>> I'm gonna release 2.5.1 over the weekend so we need to make a
>> decision.
>>
>> I'm really indifferent here so +0 - but I'm willing to include this if
>> that's what majority wants. So, what it's gonna be?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 9, 4:17 pm, Patrick Earl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I've created the issue here:
>>>
>>>    http://issues.castleproject.org/issue/CORE-27
>>>
>>> It would be fantastic if this could be given some consideration.  I
>>> would be disheartened to learn that only 7 non-essential lines of
>>> source code out of around 30,000 lines in Castle.Core are preventing a
>>> single regular .NET distribution for use within NHibernate and other
>>> libraries.  Are there any known issues with the code provided?  I'm
>>> happy to do whatever legwork is needed if anyone can point me in the
>>> right direction.  As I mentioned in the issue, I am concerned about
>>> timeliness given the upcoming NHibernate 3 release.
>>>
>>>         Patrick Earl
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 2:05 AM, Roelof Blom <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Patrick,
>>>
>>>> Please create an issue for this in YouTrack, referring to the commit
>>>> on your fork.
>>>
>>>> -- Roelof
>>>
>>>> 2010/9/2, Patrick Earl <[email protected]>:
>>>>> Ignoring all the talk about ActiveRecord client profile support, what
>>>>> about the Castle.Core picture?  NHibernate is going to release soon
>>>>> and it'd be nice if there was only a single Castle.Core.dll to
>>>>> distribute.  Are there concerns with the patch I've created?  Haven't
>>>>> heard anything except one positive reply.  Should I also submit it as
>>>>> an issue?
>>>
>>>>>         Patrick Earl
>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Patrick Earl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> I recall thinking that would come up but for whatever reason I didn't
>>>>>> deal with it in the original patch.  I just pushed a version that
>>>>>> should deal with that problem.  The trick utilized is new to me, so if
>>>>>> anyone has any better ideas I'm welcome to hear them.
>>>
>>>>>> http://github.com/patearl/Castle.Core/commit/c264dd7ecbf1ba3c39219563...
>>>
>>>>>>        Patrick Earl
>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 4:15 PM, John Simons <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Patrick,
>>>
>>>>>>> The idea is good, but at the moment you have hardcoded the loading of
>>>>>>> System.Web to .Net 2.0, how about .Net 4.0?
>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>> John
>>>
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Patrick Earl <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> To: [email protected]
>>>>>>> Sent: Mon, 30 August, 2010 7:41:16 AM
>>>>>>> Subject: Castle.Core Client Profile Support
>>>
>>>>>>> Hi.
>>>
>>>>>>> Just to get some administrivia out of the way, I tried submitting a
>>>>>>> pull request as detailed on this page:
>>>
>>>>>>> http://stw.castleproject.org/(S(su2mgm45fclhqe55veo40545))/How-to-sub...
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, no default recipients were checked and GitHub wouldn't
>>>>>>> let me send it without one.  Not being sure who to send it to, it's
>>>>>>> coming here instead.
>>>
>>>>>>> I've created a changeset that allows Castle.Core to support the client
>>>>>>> profile and full profile without forcing the distribution of two
>>>>>>> separate versions.  This has the following benefits.
>>>
>>>>>>> 1.  Users don't need to be educated on the selection of one assembly or
>>>>>>> another.
>>>>>>> 2.  Users don't need to create a more complicated build process that
>>>>>>> selects between client / full for their own projects and libraries.
>>>>>>> 3.  Reduced complexity of build / distribution process for Castle.Core.
>>>>>>> 4.  Simplified compile checks (can leave client profile target
>>>>>>> enabled) ensure that new code works with client profile.
>>>>>>> 5.  Other projects, such as NHibernate, don't need to decide upon or
>>>>>>> distribute multiple versions to suite both profiles.
>>>>>>> 6.  The link between Castle.Core and System.Web is quite small
>>>>>>> (WebLogger only depends on 6 properties / methods from 2 classes in
>>>>>>> System.Web).
>>>
>>>>>>> It has the following drawbacks:
>>>
>>>>>>> 1.  There is more code, though this is mitigated through the use of a
>>>>>>> common tested reflection helper.
>>>>>>> 2.  There is a small performance penalty when using the WebLogger class.
>>>
>>>>>>> The code can be found on a fork here:
>>>
>>>>>>> http://github.com/patearl/Castle.Core/commit/654e268f27a3a110b34eca1e...
>>>
>>>>>>> Given the tremendous benefits and minor drawbacks of this approach, I
>>>>>>> would highly recommend this code be applied.  If there's anything I
>>>>>>> can do to make this happen more smoothly, please let me know.
>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Verzonden vanaf mijn mobiele apparaat
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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 
>>>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>
> --
> 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.
>
>

-- 
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