Skip to content
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

A strongly-named assembly is required #142

Open
tiger31 opened this issue Jan 19, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

A strongly-named assembly is required #142

tiger31 opened this issue Jan 19, 2021 · 2 comments
Milestone

Comments

@tiger31
Copy link

tiger31 commented Jan 19, 2021

Hello, I'm trying to use ReportPortal.Shared functionality and getting warring on build and exception on assembly load in runtime:

Could not load file or assembly 'ReportPortal.Shared, Version=3.0.2.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' or one of its dependencies. A strongly-named assembly is required. (Exception from HRESULT: 0x80131044)

Any chance of getting this assembly strongly-named?

@nvborisenko
Copy link
Member

100%

Signing the assembly with strong name is virus. It means that we need release all left/right-over packages.

Easy change - big impact. Sorry no timelines, I believe next major version (or minor?).

@nvborisenko
Copy link
Member

To make it possible, when signing assemblies with strong name

  • NuGet package can be any version like 1.2.3
  • We should keep only major version in assembly like 1.0.0 (the same as major version from package)
  • To keep tracking exact version in assembly we can save it in any compiled attribute at assembly level (GA analytics should use it to determine exact assembly version)
  • Don't forget to recompile and republish successors (it's a virus)
  • Don't forget to increase major version

And, obviously, test it carefully. I am wondering in cases where intermediate package is referenced by any others, and the target version of referenced package is different.

@nvborisenko nvborisenko transferred this issue from reportportal/commons-net Feb 12, 2024
@nvborisenko nvborisenko added this to the 4.x milestone Feb 12, 2024
nvborisenko pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jul 11, 2024
* Add ApiKey handling

* Use ApiKey instead of Uuid

* Add ApiKey tests
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants