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.

Reply via email to