Actually, personally I'm positive to include version dependency on those driver assemblies. The reasons are:
- It is the database driver vendor who claims that a future version of the assembly is compatible with older versions of the driver or not (by "publisher policy file" i.e. policy.*.*.dll in general). - Usually a user (dblinq here) should depend on specific version of the dependency assemblies in each version of his or her application - A user (we) can finally determine whether a future version of the assembly is compatible with older versions in respect to his or her application. It can be specified by our assembly configuration (/configuration/runtime/assemblyBinding/dependentAssembly). While we would likely want to avoid loading "duplicate" assemblies (not precisely though; they have different versions), we can first iterate Assemblies in CurrentDomain, and then try Assembly.Load() with fully qualified name. Then users don't have to add extra code to load the driver assembly in prior to use dblinq. Adding custom configuration section may also look like a solution, if we want to let users to make first decision on which Type should be regarded as the target driver (it is typical scenario). But the problem here is that it works only when the dependent assemblies MUST exist *while proving the target driver*. Otherwise it will raise an error saying that the configuration system cannot find the target Type. (Am I understanding the situation correctly? I'm unsure.) Atsushi Eno Pascal Craponne wrote: > What options do we have for the database driver (the ADO one)? > How to make the guess? Shall be make a choice given another parameter in > the connection string? Shall DbLinq also scan the AppDomain, and ask > vendor if any found IDbConnection is suitable (this condition is not > sufficient, we also need to dig more). > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 22:43, Jiri Moudry <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > Pascal, Astushi - Ohayo gozaimasu & Bon soir, > seems that both of you like scanning the AppDomain for the IVendor > class and the IDbConnection implementation. > I like it also, because it results in fewer assumptions and shifts > responsibility to the user. Should we go ahread with that approach? > > > > > > -- > Pascal. > > jabber/gtalk: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DbLinq" 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/dblinq?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
