I agree, but is DP + DA rock solid? I think we all know the answer to this question!
What are the chances of DP not changing for Windsor vNext? John ________________________________ From: hammett <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thu, 23 September, 2010 9:28:45 AM Subject: Re: [Discuss] What to have and not have in a Core assembly I'm OK with features being there, as long as they are rock solid. Just two cents... On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 3:01 PM, John Simons <[email protected]> wrote: > There has been a bit of debate about Castle.Core, what to have in it and > what shouldn't be in it. > The point of this thread is to try to come to some consensus/decision on > this matter. > > So I start, I see Castle.Core having the bare minimum, example, helper > classes, extension methods, no dependencies on external assemblies, no > features (see below), no volatile stuff. > > I do consider DP + DA features and quite volatile! > > Do we need Castle.Core and Castle.Core.Features ? or Castle.Common, > Castle.Base, ...... > > What's your thoughts? > > Cheers > John -- Cheers, hammett http://hammett.castleproject.org/ -- 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.
