Re: [SolrNet] NuGet package for 0.4.0-beta2 is different from the google code download version

86 views
Skip to first unread message

Mauricio Scheffer

unread,
Oct 22, 2012, 12:47:16 PM10/22/12
to sol...@googlegroups.com
Here's the NuGet package for the Unity integration for SolrNet 0.4.0 beta2 : http://nuget.org/packages/SolrNet.Unity

--
Mauricio



On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 1:38 PM, James Strassburg <jstra...@gmail.com> wrote:
The package at: http://nuget.org/packages/SolrNet/0.4.0-beta2 is different from the download version here: http://code.google.com/p/solrnet/downloads/list . Specifically, the NuGet version doesn't contain the support for the dependency injection containers (I'm using Unity so I need the Unity.SolrNetIntegration and .Config of same). I'd like to use NuGet but need the Unity support. I can't find a separate package(s) for the SolrNetIntegration stuff. Are there different packages or will the main package contain these namespaces at some point? thanks.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SolrNet" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/solrnet/-/qoXIW8w6GsAJ.
To post to this group, send email to sol...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to solrnet+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/solrnet?hl=en.

James Strassburg

unread,
Oct 22, 2012, 1:39:09 PM10/22/12
to sol...@googlegroups.com
Awesome. Thanks. I guess I didn't find it because there is only the pre-release version so it doesn't return in the search.

James Strassburg

unread,
Oct 22, 2012, 2:17:51 PM10/22/12
to sol...@googlegroups.com
Actually, it looks to force v 2.1.505.0 of Unity and 2.1.505.2 is latest. Can the package be updated to require Unity >= 2.1.505.0?

James Strassburg

unread,
Oct 22, 2012, 2:22:24 PM10/22/12
to sol...@googlegroups.com
I was able to use the -IgnoreDepdencies flag to Install-Package so I should be ok assuming .2 didn't break anything.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages