I second the abstracted approach. But keep it tied to windsor by default so those who don't care what IoC it's using can still have an easy setup. But allowing more advanced users to create an adapter of their own for their favorite IoC. I would just be weary of adding any complexity by going this direction.
Nathan Palmer On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Jason Meckley <[email protected]>wrote: > why move away from windsor, just to take a dependency on another 3rd > party framework. if you are going to make the frame IoC agnostic, > abstract to a level of simple interfaces that any given container > would need to implement. this way there is no 3rd party dependency. > examples of how to adapt to different containers could be part of the > documentation. > > > On Oct 31, 11:14 am, Corey Kaylor <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm confident that it could all be accomplished with MEF, just not as > easily > > as any of the other containers. > > -- > 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]<rhino-tools-dev%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rhino-tools-dev?hl=en. > > -- 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.
