Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Some considerations about strong naming #36

Closed
msmolka opened this issue Feb 9, 2018 · 7 comments
Closed

Some considerations about strong naming #36

msmolka opened this issue Feb 9, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

@msmolka
Copy link

msmolka commented Feb 9, 2018

Hello
Currently there are 2 packages, one strong named, and other not. This is causing issues when using different dependencies that uses this library.
A lot of discussions here:

aspnet/DataProtection#245 (comment)
StackExchange/StackExchange.Redis#528
HangfireIO/Hangfire#1076

@msmolka
Copy link
Author

msmolka commented Feb 10, 2018

As a comment, shouldn’t, be .snk file part repository as well, like StackExchange.Redis does?

@jsakamoto
Copy link
Owner

Thank you for creating this issue.

I'll consider to combine "IPAddressRaneg" and "IPAddressRange.Signed" packages.

My plan is:

  1. Make "IPAddressRange" to be strong named with .nsk key same as "IPAddressRange.Signed" dose.
  2. Make "IPAddressRange.Signed" to be meta package that point to new version of "IPAddressRanged" package.

Is it good idea?

@msmolka
Copy link
Author

msmolka commented Feb 14, 2018

Yes, I think so,
You can also be a bit more drastic,
dump new Major version, make it strong named, and dump IPAddressRange.Signed
Strong name is not living long in this project.
It will be easier to maintain
Major change allows breaking changes.
In the future it will cause less issues.

@jsakamoto
Copy link
Owner

I'm investigating about this issue now.

Due to I read this article,

https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/blob/master/Documentation/project-docs/strong-name-signing.md

I'm considering about I should add .snk file into this repository or not.

And also, I read this article that was posted at 2 years ago,

Still Strong-Naming your Assemblies? You do know it’s 2016, right?

but I'll strong name this library, because Windows Phone is already gone, and I feel there are no problem.

@msmolka
Copy link
Author

msmolka commented Feb 21, 2018

You should add snk file. Look at e.g. Stackexchange.Redis. It is there.
That was the idea, about dropping strong naming, but because of other greater issues it was bring back. Read links I put above. There are also references in discussions about strong naming and why MS team decided to bring it back.

@jsakamoto
Copy link
Owner

jsakamoto commented Feb 23, 2018

I published new packages as beta version.

I plan to publish an official release package in a few days.

@jsakamoto
Copy link
Owner

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants