Ohh.. I see.. I will study the sources.... I have no time at all at the moment but I've always wanted that Quartz works with castle...
Any objection why this couldn't be a good idea ? On 25 mayo, 16:18, John Simons <[email protected]> wrote: > The only benefit you get from using the Castle Scheduler is the > integration with IoC (Windsor) out of the box. > But you can get this same integration with Quartz.Net, > seehttp://bugsquash.blogspot.com/2009/03/windsor-facility-for-quartznet.... > > It would be good to create an Integration facility for Quartz.net > (based on what Mauricio has already done) and deprecate the Castle > Scheduler one, any takers? > > Cheers > John > > On May 26, 2:36 am, "[email protected]" > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, > > > I see that the scheduler is released.. good! > > > I work with Quartz.net... my question is, > > > Why do not use (integrated or something) the Quart.net if it is a > > "mature" technology? > > > Why to duplicate this effort? > > > Regards and congratulations because Castle is very active.. > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Castle Project Users" 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-users?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Users" 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-users?hl=en.
