<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>> > As Sean says, it would be nice if we could use Mono.Addins facilities <BR>> > directly.<BR>> <BR>> Until I have a reason to do otherwise, I'd like to keep the wrapper as<BR>> thin as possible. There should be no reason why you couldn't use<BR>> Mono.Addins directly.<BR><BR>
One very good reason is simply this: It's out of our control.<BR>
<BR>
Another very good reason: To be able to 'snip' off the reference chain when coding for aux scenarios (like customized solutions, tools and test cases)<BR>
<BR>
A third reason: To be able to cater for application- specific cases where mono addins for some reason (behavior requirements, licensing, signing) is deemed unfit.<BR>
<BR>
All these points should be considered when looking at bringing in third party libraries. And, it goes even for mono standard libraries, if those aren't a part of the .NET framework.<BR>
<BR>
Tribal is one of those developers that will gain very little from mono addins, customizes plugin loading on a daily basis, and risk a lot of frustration from it being wired into the core.<BR>
<BR>
Keep that wrapper. Thin, sure, but keep it.<BR>
<BR>> > On a more general note Ryan, I'd like to know what your impressions are <BR>> > of Mono.Addins and whether you think it's a good choice for OpenSim. <BR>> > Personally, I looked at it somewhat superficially a while back and I <BR>> > wasn't convinced about the quality of the code or the documentation <BR>> > (thogh this is the pot calling the kettle black), but things may have <BR>> > moved on.<BR>> <BR>> The documentation is great I think. Certainly above that of OpenSim. :)<BR>> <BR>> Code quality, I have no idea. Until it either brakes for us, or mono<BR>> implements the Addin found in the latest .net runtime, I don't see that<BR>> there is much choice.<BR><BR>
/Stefan<BR></body>
</html>