search

sharpdx / SharpDX

SharpDX GitHub Repository
http://sharpdx.org
MIT License
1.7k stars 638 forks source link

Version 4's lack of strong naming is a hardship #912

Closed jnm2 closed 7 years ago

jnm2 commented 7 years ago

Please continue strong-naming. For companies that need some assemblies to be strong named, this leaves us no option but to create modified SharpDX DLLs. Using SharpDX in our build process is no longer as simple as a package reference.

It's unusual for a top library on NuGet to not be signed. People that don't need signing won't care either way, but life just got a little worse for those of us who do.

Thanks for considering! ❤️

xoofx commented 7 years ago

Well, this is a bug when switching to appveyor.yml while previously the config was private on appveyor. The snk file was written from the config, but it seems that I forgot to port it to appveyor.yml

I always thought that people would try the pre-release version of SharpDX in order to report this problem... should have maybe insist on the twitter feed to encourage users to do this...

Will be able to fix this hopefully today

jnm2 commented 7 years ago

@xoofx I'm glad to hear it wasn't intentional! Twitter is not a bad idea, would have worked for me. Another idea for this particular scenario is a build-time check which fails the build if there are any unsigned assemblies about to be packed or published.

xoofx commented 7 years ago

strange, while checking the log, we are actually signing assemblies... not sure what is going on... will have to investigate a bit more...

jnm2 commented 7 years ago

Whatever got uploaded to NuGet in the net45 folders was not signed. The ones I checked are SharpDX, SharpDX.DXGI, SharpDX.Direct2D1 and SharpDX.Direct3D11.

xoofx commented 7 years ago

I have pushed 4.0.1. This should hopefully fix this

jnm2 commented 7 years ago

Thanks for the fast resolution!