> http://www.codeplex.com/Signer

Are you implying that any project that uses Castle and needs its
assemblies to be strong-named should just use Signer and sign them by
itself?

If so, I think this would be a very bad default. Libraries should be
strong-named so that they can be reused in strong-named applications
and other libraries. Everything else would be an unpleasant surprise.
If someone really needs a version of the Castle stack without strong
naming (for whatever reason), he or she should be required remove the
strong names, not the other way around.

What are the actual arguments in favor of removing strong names?

The posting cited by John (
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel/browse_thread/thread/4a2cdffa18ab6583
) seems to me an argument for releasing (or re-releasing the same
version with updated references) more often rather than just removing
strong names. .NET provides facilities to use newer versions of
referenced libraries (assembly dependency rebinding), and that
mechanism is very explicit for a good reason: it can easily break
something if the newer version isn't fully backwards compatible.

The argument that the snk is publicly available anyway is a good one.
But I'd rather solve it by having a private key for official builds
that is not in source control and available to only a limited number
of people. E.g. Castle Stronghold, or the PMC.

Fabian

> On Feb 11, 7:40 pm, James Curran <[email protected]> wrote:
>> A strong-named assembly cannot use a non-string-named assembly.
>> Since many of Castle's parts (like Windsor, DP and ActiveRecord), are
>> used as building blocks of third-party tools -- which themselves might
>> be strong-named, our assemblied must be.
>>
>> Truth,
>>     James
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:23 AM, John Simons <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> > Why are we strong naming the Castle assemblies?
>> > As far as I know it doesn't really gives us any benefits, if we didn't
>> > strong name assemblies we wouldn't have problems like this:
>> >http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel/browse_thread/thr...
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Castle Project Development List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Castle Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.

Reply via email to