Personally never used the feature either, so I have no problem with
seeing it go.

Regarding the Add-In removal scenario, we should also keep in mind
that we can't unload assemblies from the AppDomain, so even if we
could unregister a component from Windsor, we can't remove the
assembly in any case. Restarting the process sounds like a safer
alternative.

On Aug 29, 9:52 am, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:
> FWIW, I don't think that MEF gives you the ability to unload a component
>
> 2010/8/29 Alex Henderson <[email protected]>
>
> > We use it currently in a product where we have plugins that register
> > services in the container, and those services can be unregistered (if the
> > plugin is removed/disabled) which will effectively undo all the
> > registrations via remove in reverse order.
>
> > Though we currently haven't phased it out, we plan to end of life this live
> > disable functionality in favour of restarting the entire application when
> > one or more plugin removals/disable actions takes place (like how say Hudson
> > does it) - because of the aforementioned problem - 9 times out of 10 it will
> > throw an exception when attempting to remove a component anyway due to
> > interdependencies.
>
> > The use cases for remove tend to suggest something like MEF instead of
> > Windsor I think - So I'm happy for this functionality to be removed, even
> > though we do (kinda) currently rely on it.
>
> > Cheers,
>
> > Alex
>
> > 2010/8/29 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>
>
> >>  Hey guys.
>
> >> I'm looking at some more serious modifications that we could do for
> >> Windsor 3.0 and one thing that I'd really like to get rid of is
> >> IKernel.RemoveComponent (not to be confused with IKernel.ReleaseComponent 
> >> or
> >> IWindsorContainer.Release). I'm talking about method that is the opposite 
> >> of
> >> Register, not Resolve.
>
> >> The method is very flawed, not thread safe, has bugs, its usability is at
> >> best questionable and getting rid of it (so that I can make an assumption
> >> that once a component is in the container it can not dissappear) would
> >> enable me to get rid of lots of code and make some performance
> >> optimizations.
>
> >> So my question is - what do you think about this idea - did anyone of you
> >> ever really used this? If so - why and for what?
>
> >> feedback greatly appreciated, thanks
>
> >> --
> >> 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]<castle-project-users%[email protected]>
> >> .
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >>http://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]<castle-project-users%[email protected]>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://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.

Reply via email to