For third part consumers who signs their assemblies. Afaik, you can't
generate a signed assemblies with references for unsigned assemblies.

Cheers,
Henry Conceição



2010/8/24 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>:
>  What I want in the future is to be able to corelate each and every binary
> we produce with revision that it was created from.
> As far as I'm concerned we can always set revision part in version number to
> 0 and have the git revision id stored somewhere else - I don't really care
> (although I like the idea of counting number of commits since last release).
>
> Can anyone remind me why we're producing signed assemblies? (it's a genune
> question). I know that it was required when Windsor had a installer that was
> deploying the binaries to GAC, so is it just a leftover or do we have some
> actual reasons for keeping on doing so?
>
> Krzysztof
>
> On 24/08/2010 5:38 PM, SerialSeb wrote:
>>
>> Few notes that may be of interest for the castle project re: openwrap.
>>
>> The version is only significant for its 3 compoents, the revision is
>> ignored when defining your dependencies; and the dlls for all profiles
>> can (and should) exist in the same package.
>>
>> And finally, assembly signing is discouraged, to prevent breaking
>> binary compat across versions without having to deal with publisher
>> policies etc.
>>
>> Seb
>>
>> On Aug 23, 4:12 pm, Henry Conceição<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> About the sf.net: Yes, since they have a cdn, and we only have one
>>> server with a limited bandwidth.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Henry Conceição
>>>
>>> 2010/8/23 John Simons<[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Krzysztof,
>>>> In your opinion what are the major pain points?
>>>> To me one pain point is actually having to upload the zip onto sf.net.
>>>> Is
>>>> there a reason why we still need to do this? Can we instead tag the
>>>> teamcity
>>>> build and expose the zip as a link on the website?
>>>> John
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]>
>>>> To: Castle Project Devel<[email protected]>
>>>> Sent: Sun, 22 August, 2010 9:26:34 PM
>>>> Subject: some thoughts on our build process
>>>> Hey,
>>>> having gone throuh the pain of releasing Core and Windsor today I wanted
>>>> to
>>>> say one thing - it's extremely painful to go thought. All the (many)
>>>> steps
>>>> are manual and require a lot of time to complete. It took me half of the
>>>> day
>>>> to get it all working and out the door. That's not how it should be. I
>>>> chatted with Roelof and he proposed that we should look into automating
>>>> as
>>>> much of the process as possible. I couldn't agree more.
>>>> We should also change how we assing build numbers. Currently we use
>>>> autoincremented builds count from TeamCity which has the drawback that
>>>> if we
>>>> release several version of the  same project (for .NET 3.5, 4.0, 4.0 CP,
>>>> two
>>>> versions of SIlverlight, possibly Mono in the future) all of them have
>>>> different numbers. For the release I manually set up the counter to be
>>>> the
>>>> same for all builds but we should have it done automatically.
>>>> This is a major issue and to keep shipping the software on a sustainable
>>>> pace we need to streamline and automate it a lot.
>>>> Comments and ideas welcome.
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>> -- 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.- Hide quoted
>>>> text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>
> --
> 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