On 2011-02-20, Robert Jordan wrote: > On 20.02.2011 07:49, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> If you talk about strong naming assemblies then I don't have any >> experience how a well designed scheme of sharing the key between several >> developers might work. As the maintainer of XMLUnit I'd be interested >> in a good solution myself.
> Many open source projects are keeping the key pair (*.snk) > together with the source code in their repository because > the security significance of the key is zero. > Given how .NET assembly signing was designed, no one > would be able to generate a compatible Lucene.Net assembly > from source code w/out having to update assembly > references in all projects using Lucene.Net. > This is hardly compatible with open source principles > and should be avoided. I agree but users have asked for a strong named version of XMLUnit in the past so I was thinking about providing one as alternative. I've seen similar user requests for log4net or NUnit as well. Stefan
