Have they changed enough to be concerned about putting them in core?  I am fine 
with an aggregated assembly if preference is not in Core.


On Sep 22, 2010, at 11:28 AM, Henry Conceição wrote:

> And how about create a new project to aggregate those? Less assemblies
> to maintain/release and we don't pollute the top projects.
> 
> Cheers,
> Henry Conceição
> 
> 
> 
> 2010/9/22 Craig Neuwirt <[email protected]>:
>> I don't think they should be moved into MR.  They are very useful by
>> themselves and having to pull in MR just to get them would be extreme.  I'd
>> rather see them in Core although I am sure that is not popular consensus.
>> On Sep 22, 2010, at 5:07 AM, John Simons wrote:
>> 
>> If the consensus is to move Binder and/or Pagination into MR, I'm going to
>> need some help with this because I have no idea how to move them with
>> history.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> John
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> From: Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: Wed, 22 September, 2010 7:56:23 PM
>> Subject: Re: Projects release saga
>> 
>> On 22/09/2010 7:49 PM, John Simons wrote:
>>> Actually I've just re-read your question "how bringing some facilities
>>> to Windsor's repository will affect it negatively?"
>>> and I don't see any negative affects as long as the release of the
>>> facilities is still separate.
>> Cool, glad we agree :)
>>> In MR I'm planning to have 3 release packages:
>>> - The core MVC framework (this will include Validation + Binder +
>>> Pagination + Core)
>>> - The AR extension (this includes AR + its dependencies that are not
>>> already included in main package)
>>> - The Windsor extension (this includes Windsor + its dependencies that
>>> are not already included in main package)
>> sounds good.
>>> BTW, there was a discussion a while ago about merging binder into MR
>>> (http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel/browse_thread/
>>> thread/432e826d2b94a27c/3ae1e1b117a0cfed), are we still good to do
>>> this?
>>> Also in the same discussion we talked about moving Pagination into MR,
>>> and there were 2 people opposed, is this still a no go?
>> No opinion for pagination, +1 for Binder.
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Krzysztof
>>> Cheers
>>> John
>> 
>> -- 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.
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 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