New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
.NET Core - strong name assemblies #124
Comments
I think we should park the strong naming topic until we've got everything else sorted out. If we provide a strong named package we won't be able to provide our Serilog integration (unless serilog/serilog#589 happens), however it also blocks us from ever using JSON.NET. I didn't get the response I was after to: #118 (comment). |
Just a heads-up, Serilog is moving to (and will stick with) strong naming on .NET Core. PR is ready to merge on the Serilog side, will be out in the next v2 beta build. |
@nblumhardt thanks Nick. |
@jonorossi I had thought that @Eilon has answered the question in #118 (comment). Are there more information that you are expecting? Would you mind list them again? I was thinking about providing two projects: one unsigned and the other signed. Users can choose what they need. |
Microsoft has decided that strong names are staying with .NET Core so lets get this sorted. Can you send through a PR adding the strong name key into the project.json file, we only want a single package having two is the worst option, this would at least align with what we've done for the last decade and keep the identity the same between netfx and netcore. |
BTW projects such as ASP.NET Core have strong-name signing enabled, and the private keys are checked into the public repo. E.g. for ASP.NET Core MVC the private key (generated with sn.exe) is here: https://github.com/aspnet/Mvc/tree/dev/tools |
@jonorossi My sincere condolences at your loss. I am glad to see you back! i will add the key back. One question: do you also want all the targeted frameworks (net35, net40, etc.) in the |
@Eilon yep, our strong name private key has been committed to our repo since day one. @jeremymeng thanks, it means a lot. Hopefully I'm back, I'm going to try directing people to do things more and stay hands off the code for a bit to see how that goes. Just do the strong name key for now, let's discuss the project.json file in #134. |
@jonorossi what do you think about having both signed and unsigned nupkgs so that people can choose what they want?
For illustration I added a signed project in https://github.com/castleproject/Core/compare/netcore...jeremymeng:signed?expand=1. (This requires RC1 and later.) The project would generate
Castle.Core.Signed.3.3.4.nupkg
with the following contentsor name it
Castle.Core.StrongName.3.3.4.nupkg
if that sounds better.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: