Horn is not the finished article but we have made strides to making it a
viable solution.

Obvioiusly a .NET OSS aggregator/ package manager or whatever it is, is not
the easiest problem space in the world :-)

Cheers

Paul Cowan

Cutting-Edge Solutions (Scotland)

http://thesoftwaresimpleton.blogspot.com/



2009/8/19 Wayne Douglas <[email protected]>

>
> +1 horn friendly - it made my life soooo much easier over the weekend!!
>
> :)
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Paul Cowan<[email protected]> wrote:
> > I would love you guys to take a look at using horn for this type of
> thing.
> >
> > The more of the big OSS guys that get involved then the more we can move
> to
> > making all the OSS bits play together.
> >
> > The feedback would be immense for horn.
> > Cheers
> >
> > Paul Cowan
> >
> > Cutting-Edge Solutions (Scotland)
> >
> > http://thesoftwaresimpleton.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> >
> > 2009/8/19 Bart Reyserhove <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> +1 then. I'm in favor of everything that makes upgrading to a newer
> >> version easier.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> That is a consideration, but I am more worried about something like
> >>> commons that depends on _everything_.
> >>> In a single chain of dependencies, we would get the error on
> compilation,
> >>> so that is not something I worry about.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Bart Reyserhove
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> We could use horn to ease the dependency pain. I used it for our
> >>>> internal framework and it definitely makes things easier.
> >>>> Wouldn't it make things even more complex if each project has its own
> >>>> dependencies and you want to use different of those projects in your
> >>>> application? You could have a situation that "rhino commons" depends
> on
> >>>> version 1 of Windsor and "rhino security" depends on version 2 of
> Windsor
> >>>> for example.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Right now, Rhino Tools has dependencies for just about everything.
> >>>>> I would like to upgrade the code to NH 2.1 and Windsor 2.0, but I am
> >>>>> running into issues with the number of dependencies that we have and
> the
> >>>>> number of _inter_ dependencies between them.
> >>>>> I am severely tempted to start removing dependencies and simplifying
> >>>>> things overall.
> >>>>> In practice, what this means is that I would like to deprecate the
> >>>>> entire Rhino Commons, and structure the project so each sub project
> host its
> >>>>> own dependencies.
> >>>>> We are still going to have inter dependencies (for example, DHT
> depends
> >>>>> on PHT), but I think that this would significantly reduce them.
> >>>>> Thoughts? Votes?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> w://
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Rhino Tools Dev" 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/rhino-tools-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to