Have you also consider moving some of these into Contrib projects?



________________________________
From: Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wed, 22 September, 2010 8:30:12 PM
Subject: Re: Moving some facilities out of Castle.Windsor.dll (in v3)

correct.

Still - we are open source project so I try to be as open and     transparent 
about my ideas and decisions as possible

On 22/09/2010 8:28 PM, John Simons wrote: 
But even if they do, we are not deleting it! All you're           proposing is 
move it to another assembly, not a big deal IMHO.
>
>Cheers
>John
>
>
>
>
________________________________
From: Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>
>To: [email protected]
>Sent: Wed,               22 September, 2010 8:10:40 PM
>Subject: Re: Moving some facilities out of Castle.Windsor.dll (in              
> 
>v3)
>
>Actually last month I stumbled upon a question on             StackOverflow 
>about Remoting Facility.
>I think vast (I mean 99% or more) majority of users don't             care 
>about 
>it, hence the idea to move it out.
>
>On 22/09/2010 8:03 PM, Valeriu Caraulean wrote: 
>+1 on moving in separate               assemblies.  
>>
>>
>>And may be it will serve as first step to deprecate                   
>>Remoting 
>>facility. I haven't seen in a while                   discussions/mentions of 
>>this facility. 
>>Also, Event Wiring is not too much talked around... 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at                       10:41 AM, xtoff 
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>regardless of                         the discussion in the other thread, I'm 
>>still                         interested
>>>in your feedback here, so do speak up.
>>>
>>>On Sep 22, 2:48 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>   Hey,
>>>>
>>>> I want to do some rework for Windsor 3,                             and 
>>>> slim it 
>>>>down a little, and
>>>> as part of it, I'm considering moving                             the 
>>>> following 
>>>>facilities out of
>>>> Windsor.dll to their own assemblies                             (similar 
>>>> to 
>>>>Synchronize Facility)
>>>>
>>>>     * Event Wiring facility (because                             it's not 
>>>> that 
>>>>useful/used)
>>>>     * Remoting Facility (because                             remoting is 
>>>>de-facto obsolete)
>>>>     * Factory Support (because with                             
>>>>UsingFactoryMethod in the fluent API
>>>>       not depending on it, there's no                             really 
>>>> good 
>>>>reason to use it
>>>>       unless you register stuff via                             XML)
>>>>
>>>> That would mean that only Startable and                             
>>>>TypedFactory facilities would
>>>> still live in Windsor.dll
>>>>
>>>> Objections? Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>
>>>--
>>>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.
>>>
>>>
>>
-- 
>>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.
>>
-- 
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.

>        -- 
>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.
>

-- 
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.



      

-- 
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