[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET-397?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13789079#comment-13789079
]
Stefan Bodewig commented on LOG4NET-397:
----------------------------------------
So far I had assumed you had no influence on the suppliers :-)
When we swiitched to the new key two years ago, there was strong demand for
supporting 1.x - believe it or not.
While the current setup may be inconvenient or in your case more than just
that, breaking existing setups that use the new-key log4net assembly by
renaming it again wouldn't be a change people would welcome either.
There is a hypotetcical log4net 2.x which was allowed to break backwards
compatibility and so on. This one should have a different file name as well -
maybe it is time to cut a 2.x release with oldkey and newkey log4net assemblies
that both contain type forwarders to a newkey log4net2 assembly only. I'll
open a discussion for this on the dev and maybe even the user list and we'll
see where it goes. You'd be more than welcome to voice your opinion there.
JIRA tickets aren't really a good place for discussion, much less decision
making.
> Conflicts due to new strong name key
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LOG4NET-397
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET-397
> Project: Log4net
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Joe
>
> Consider an application that uses two third-party assemblies:
> - AssemblyA from Supplier A, compiled with log4net 1.2.10 (old strong-name
> key)
> - AssemblyB from Supplier B, compiled with log4net 1.2.11 (new strong-name
> key)
> How can I make these two assemblies co-exist and use the same version of
> log4net?
> Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but I can't see any way to do this: for
> example I obviously can't have both log4net assemblies in the same bin
> folder, as they have the same name.
> I'm obviously not the only one who thinks there's a problem, e.g. issue
> LOG4NET-324 refers to "... the strong name horror too". The comment on this
> issue:
> "... But if you need the old "strong name", you can simply use the "oldkey"
> binaries. I can't see how this is a horror, but of course I'm biased."
> doesn't seem to address the problem of conflicts.
> Also there are no guidelines for component suppliers as to which version to
> use, which increases the risk of conflicts. In the absence of explicit
> guidelines, I guess legacy components will have the old key, whereas new ones
> will tend to use the new key, since that is the only version available via
> NuGet.
> The only solution I can see is the following:
> - The "new key" assembly needs to have a different name from the "old key"
> assembly (e.g. log4net-2.dll).
> - Use Type forwarding to enable both versions to co-exist. E.g. you could
> supply a special log4net.dll signed with the old key that uses type
> forwarding to forward to log4net-2.dll signed with the new key. Or
> vice-versa.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
