activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill.E" <william.eid...@americanhm.com>
Subject Re: Strong name key file missing
Date Mon, 14 May 2007 13:27:14 GMT

Agreed,  but it does make it difficult to build the code locally with strong
named assemblies for use in the GAC.  Do you suggest just generating a new
one locally for convienience sake?   

This brings up a small issue with this form of distributed code development.  
I haven't been involved with building much open source projects.  What is
the general rule for handling this kind of thing?

Will the binaries released be strong named/signed?

thanks in advance

bille


Hiram Chirino wrote:
> 
> It does not make sense to include the file since that is a private
> key.  If the private key was publicly accessible, then anybody to
> could sign a release and that would not be saying much would it?
> 
> On 5/10/07, Bill.E <william.eidson@americanhm.com> wrote:
>>
>> the .net build from yesterday did not include activemq-dotnet.snk strong
>> name
>> file
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Strong-name-key-file-missing-tf3725224s2354.html#a10425150
>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Hiram
> 
> Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Strong-name-key-file-missing-tf3725224s2354.html#a10603731
Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message