Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
Changed by [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=80225 --- shadow/80225 2006-12-11 17:22:20.000000000 -0500 +++ shadow/80225.tmp.22092 2006-12-11 17:58:30.000000000 -0500 @@ -62,6 +62,25 @@ work in order to work with Mono (perhaps yes as only a temporal workaround), or then we could get into a similar world as the web developers are in, where they have to take care of each browser that exists in the world. Thanks for your answer. + +------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-11 17:58 ------- +Wrong interpretation. The "some" cases are for nulls (not for a public +key being present). I know it because I wrote that FIXME ;-) + +Now it's possible that nulls may never happen with 2.0 (the comments +predates that). However I'm pretty sure Mono itself depends, or +depended, on the null value. So it's not a trivial change, requires +tests to find the real issue (not just a working/not working test +case) and reviewing Mono source code for it's usage. It may not be +related to this FIXME but I recall some differences when S.R.E is used +to create an assembly (versus loading one from disk). + +While it has nothing to do with Mono fixing the issue, I still think +you should report the issue to NHibernate folks. Why ? because it's +the "right thing" to do when you find a bug. It's also a simple change +(for them), it may fix an issue for NHibernate (e.g. if MS does +returns null in certain cases) and it also allows existing versions of +Mono to execute NHibernate. _______________________________________________ mono-bugs maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs
