search

mfenniak / rethinkdb-net

A C# / .NET client driver for RethinkDB.
Other
247 stars 37 forks source link

Provide strongly named assemblies #71

Open mfenniak opened 11 years ago

dragan commented 11 years ago

We need to be careful with this one. Personally, I'm not a big fan of strong naming. I like to leave it up to the user. If they need it, have them do it.

mfenniak commented 11 years ago

My preference is to provide a strong named build when providing a binary download (ie. NuGet), just to allow anyone who works in a strong-named environment to pick it up and use it easily. I don't see any downsides to doing this; it still allows other people to create custom builds, and even sign them (with their own key) if they desire. What are you concerned about, specifically?

dragan commented 11 years ago

You can't update the AssemblyVersion on every push to NuGet, it will break people's reference bindings, due to the signing. If we end up signing, we should only change the AssemblyVersion on releases where there's breaking changes, i.e. major releases. Otherwise we just keep updating the AssemblyFileVersion to hold the true version during minor releases.

squidge commented 11 years ago

RE: we just keep updating the AssemblyFileVersion to hold the true version during minor releases. That is exactly what we do at my work place

dragan commented 11 years ago

If we want to use semver, then using AssemblyInformationalVersion will probably be better. I prefer semver BTW.