Castle.Core Optional Dependencies

Oct 11, 2010 at 11:54 PM

Reposting from nupackpackages per davidebb...

Castle.Core has two optional dependencies for integration with NLog and/or log4net.  They are only necessary if you wish for Castle.Core to log to either logging framework, if at all.  The original Castle.Core nuspec for 1.2.0 had NLog and log4net as dependencies, but while posting 2.5.1 I removed these optional dependencies while leaving the assemblies necessary for integration should the user choose that path.  While users/consumers of the package must still configure Castle.Core to use either framework and could remove the dependencies manually the whole thing seems presumptuous.

It might be more prudent in this case to have a Castle.Core NLog Integration package and Castle.Core log4net Integration package which both adds the approriate assemblies and updates the config file (a-la Elmah).

Thoughts?

Oct 12, 2010 at 12:41 PM
I think you have the correct solution there.

This pattern is already in use in Ruby Gems and in Nu(bular).

To reiterate:

Make a base package that contains the core stuff - Castle.Core
Make derivative packages that depend on the base and include just the extra stuff: Castle.Core-NLog and Castle.Core-log4net.


On Oct 11, 2010, at 7:54 PM, cromwellryan wrote:

> From: cromwellryan
>
> Reposting from nupackpackages per davidebb...
>
> Castle.Core has two optional dependencies for integration with NLog and/or log4net. They are only necessary if you wish for Castle.Core to log to either logging framework, if at all. The original Castle.Core nuspec for 1.2.0 had NLog and log4net as dependencies, but while posting 2.5.1 I removed these optional dependencies while leaving the assemblies necessary for integration should the user choose that path. While users/consumers of the package must still configure Castle.Core to use either framework and could remove the dependencies manually the whole thing seems presumptuous.
>
> It might be more prudent in this case to have a Castle.Core NLog Integration package and Castle.Core log4net Integration package which both adds the approriate assemblies and updates the config file (a-la Elmah).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Read the full discussion online.
>
> To add a post to this discussion, reply to this email ([email removed])
>
> To start a new discussion for this project, email [email removed]
>
> You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this discussion on CodePlex. You can unsubscribe or change your settings on codePlex.com.
>
> Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at codeplex.com
>
Oct 12, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Sounds like a plan!

From: brendanjerwin [mailto:notifications@codeplex.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 8:42 AM
To: cromwellryan@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Castle.Core Optional Dependencies [nupack:230498]

From: brendanjerwin

I think you have the correct solution there.

This pattern is already in use in Ruby Gems and in Nu(bular).

To reiterate:

Make a base package that contains the core stuff - Castle.Core
Make derivative packages that depend on the base and include just the extra stuff: Castle.Core-NLog and Castle.Core-log4net.


On Oct 11, 2010, at 7:54 PM, cromwellryan wrote:

> From: cromwellryan
>
> Reposting from nupackpackages per
davidebb...
>
> Castle.Core has two optional dependencies for integration with NLog and/or log4net. They are only necessary if you wish for Castle.Core to log to either logging framework, if at all. The original Castle.Core nuspec for 1.2.0 had NLog and log4net as dependencies, but while posting 2.5.1 I removed these optional dependencies while leaving the assemblies necessary for integration should the user choose that path. While users/consumers of the package must still configure Castle.Core to use either framework and could remove the dependencies manually the whole thing seems presumptuous.
>
> It might be more prudent in this case to have a Castle.Core NLog Integration package and Castle.Core log4net Integration package which both adds the approriate assemblies and updates the config file (a-la Elmah).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Read the full discussion online.
>
> To add a post to this discussion, reply to this email ([email removed])
>
> To start a new discussion for this project, email [email removed]
>
> You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this discussion on CodePlex. You can unsubscribe or change your settings on codePlex.com.
>
> Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at codeplex.com
>

Read the full discussion online.

To add a post to this discussion, reply to this email (nupack@discussions.codeplex.com)

To start a new discussion for this project, email nupack@discussions.codeplex.com

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this discussion on CodePlex. You can unsubscribe on CodePlex.com.

Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at CodePlex.com