What braking changes are there? If it just means another assembly and behavior is the same I say go for it. The castle dep has been a numbs one obstacle to this projects adoption. There is one thing I may have a problem with but will check that branch when I get home. On Apr 15, 2011 3:24 AM, "Steve Wagner" <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok that is much better. I fallen about that branch right after ive send > the message. > > What you can do is simply. Make an announcement about the change and > what breaking changes are there. Then give the people an ultimatum to > answer (in example 7 days) and if no one have a reason against it, do > the merge. > > Since i mainly interested in using ESB with Autofac, where can i help > you with the Autofac parts? > > -Steve > > On 14.04.2011 23:50, Corey Kaylor wrote: >> Sounds very similar to the work I did as well, including configuration >> changes, etc. Did you by chance look at the branch I have on github? My only >> reservation to merging into master is that certain people who don't seem to >> have an opinion will likely have one after the fact and I don't really have >> a lot of free time on my hands at the moment. I would love to close this out >> though, we've been using StructureMap with RSB for some time now and it's >> working out well. I also have a 80% implemented Autofac container as well. >> >> https://github.com/hibernating-rhinos/rhino-esb/tree/servicelocator >> >> Thoughts? >> >> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Steve Wagner<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Ok lets bring this a bit forward! >>> >>> https://github.com/lanwin/rhino-esb >>> >>> Ive created a fork and extracted all Windsor specific stuff to an >>> Rhino.ServiceBus.Windsor assembly. Then I've replaced all usages of the >>> Kernel in the core parts with an IContainerAdapter interface and added an >>> impl of it to the Rhino.ServiceBus.Windsor. This assembly contains mostly >>> configuration,facilities and hosts. >>> >>> It works, all tests pass and the Starbucks example runs. The only problem >>> is that the Starbucks.Tests dont run because it dose not Shadowcopy both >>> assemblies. Maybe someone else has an idea why?!? >>> >>> If we now move the common functionality of the configuration,facilities and >>> hosts to more abstract base classes, we have a pretty good extension point >>> for using another container. Also Windsor could stay the main container of >>> RSB. >>> >>> For existing users there is nearly no migration overhead. They only need to >>> add the new assembly and they are done, no breaking changes. >>> >>> If the second assembly is really a problem, we could provide an second >>> ilmerged distribution package. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> -Steve >>> >>> >>> On 01.02.2011 23:02, Corey Kaylor wrote: >>> >>>> It is both 3.5 and 4.0 currently, 4.0 is built from the powershell script. >>>> Although all that is negotiable depending on the route chosen. >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >>> >> > > -- > 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. >
-- 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.
