﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Ayende @ Rahien</title><link>http://ayende.com</link><description>Ayende @ Rahien</description><copyright>Copyright (C) Ayende Rahien  2004 - 2021 (c) 2026</copyright><ttl>60</ttl><item><title>David Gardiner commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>I've tried to document the necessary steps to compiling the code to get this to run.
  
  
-dave
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment13</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment13</guid><pubDate>Sun, 28 Oct 2007 11:47:30 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Ayende Rahien commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>Paul,
  
Yes, you can.
  
After you init the container,
  
BooReader.Read(container, "boo file")
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment12</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment12</guid><pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:40:36 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Paul Cowan commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>I guess what I want to know is, can I use binsor to load all my services &lt;component id='blah' type=''...
  
  
And still keep the xml for my facilities?
  
  
Is this possible.
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment11</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment11</guid><pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:52:26 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>ignu commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>i have to second binsor being it's own project...
  
  
my environment is pretty open to open source(we're using nhibernate, windsor and nlog in our project)..... but introducing the terms "binsor" AND "rhino commons" just to get slimmer config files is a difficult argument to make.
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment10</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment10</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:49:36 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Tom Opgenorth commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>Hmmm, I guess I should go get Binsor 2.0 and update my quick intro to Binsor on my website.  
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment9</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment9</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:40:26 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Ayende Rahien commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>What I think that people are missing is that those are just the icing on the cake.
  
The main advantages are that you get rid of repeated stuff. This just mean that you can get read of even more stuff
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment8</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment8</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:23:35 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Arne Claassen commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>I have to admit that I must have been working with XML for too long, because I look at both versions and can grok the XML quicker and feel more confident that I wouldn't make syntax errors in writing it.
  
  
I won't argue about XML is verbosity, not being a language, etc. But for defining hierarchical configuration data, I have no problem reading it. And I don't have to learn a new syntax for every configuration I need to undertake.
  
  
I agree that once XML gets used to define logical things like if/else, etc. it's no longer config and XML is the wrong approach. But for most things that I need to configure, I'd rather them all be XML, because it reduces the learning curve and I can parse/generate/author it with one set of tools.
  
  
Mind you, I'm not promoting configuration over convention, but just saying if there is configuration to be done, I like the XML syntax.
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment7</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment7</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:18:23 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Paul Cowan commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>Now one thing I would like to throw in the mix is............
  
  
One thing I like about the xml approach in conjunction nant is being able to pass in properties like the connection string from the command line and then use xmlpoke to set them dependant on the environment.
  
  
Now how would we do that with the binsor approach..............
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment6</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment6</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:49:17 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Ayende Rahien commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>Paul,
  
http://www.ayende.com/Blog/category/451.aspx
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment5</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment5</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:15:16 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Ayende Rahien commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>Torkel,
  
Yes, I'll probably do that 
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment4</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment4</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:11:06 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Paul Cowan commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>I really like the look of binsor and have hated the bloated config files we have been producing in our apps for some time.
  
  
Is there a good binsor tutorial anywhere?
  
  
Cheers
  
  
Paul
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment3</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment3</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:49:10 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Torkel commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>Have you ever considered extracting Binsor from Rhino Commons to separate project? 
  
  
Binsor adds great value to the Windsor container and having it as a separate project might make it easier for people to use, also a rhino commons or a separate binsor release that was built against castle RC3 would be great. It's not bad but it's a little work to get rhino commons to compile against latest caste and nhibernate release. 
  
  
  
  
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment2</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment2</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:13:43 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Gian Maria commented on Binsor 2.0</title><description>Ok, it is clear that you hate XML :D. I must admit that bindsor is really interesting, but I like the XML syntax too. It would be interesting making a pool to understand how many people feels confortable with XML and how many feels the need for a different syntax to handle configurations.
  
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment1</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2898/binsor-2-0#comment1</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:03:27 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>