Why not just apply semver and make it v2?

-- Ramon


On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >On 2013-10-25, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> >
> >>> * the next release will be 1.3.0 and require .NET 2.0 or better
> >
> >>>  I.e. we remove support for .NET 1.0 and 1.1, Compact Framework 1.0,
> >>>  Mono < 2.0, SSCLI and CLI 1.0 frameworks
> >
> >> That's even worth a +2! ;-)
> >
> >>> * the main assembly will get a new name like log4net-13.dll, only be
> >>>  signed by the new key
> >
> >>> * we provide two assemblies named log4net.dll signed with the old and
> >>>  new key respecitvely that contain type forwards to the new assembly
> >>>  only
> >
> >> I'm afraid that I can't quite grasp all the stuff we could break. We
> should
> >> definitely work out every possible usecase we may break. We have messed
> >> enough and should try to not raise the tempers even more.
> >
> >Understood, I'll take that to the user list for a bigger audience -
> >maybe people will see problems that we are overlooking.
>
> Worth a try.
>
> >>> stuff we haven't talked about, yet:
> >
> >>> * I'd like to split log4net-13.dll so that the main assembly can be
> used
> >>>  for the client profile and a separate assembly contains the stuff that
> >>>  requires System.Web - this way we no longer need the -cp builds.
> >
> >> The client profile was dropped with .NET 4.5 and previous versions are
> >> automatically upgraded to include the missing DLLs once somebody runs an
> >> update. Thus I'm not sure if we should really split the library and
> double
> >> the required efforts.
> >
> >I see.  I wasn't aware the client profile was dropped again - spending
> >most if not all of my working hours in Java land has made me lose track,
> >or so it seems.  In that case splitting the assembly doesn't make to
> >much sense.
> >
> >And the client profile builds can be removed when log4net drops support
> >for .NET 4.0 ten years from now ;-)
>
> True. I wanted to quote where I have this information from:
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc656912.aspx
>
>

Reply via email to