activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hiram Chirino" <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
Subject Re: Strong name key file missing
Date Mon, 14 May 2007 13:44:57 GMT
Hi

On 5/14/07, Bill.E <william.eidson@americanhm.com> wrote:
>
> 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?

Yes.

>
> 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?
>

We still have not done an official release of the .NET stuff so we
have not yet run into this.  But I imagine that we will need to place
the private key in secure location that Apache committers can access.

> Will the binaries released be strong named/signed?
>

If we do a binary release, yes.

> 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.
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com

Mime
View raw message