tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post7499781858199219405..comments2023-03-22T00:24:44.986-07:00Comments on David Ebbo: NuGet versioning Part 3: unification via binding redirectsDavid Ebbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10231048261702011658noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-68133784767686631742012-11-14T14:49:21.413-08:002012-11-14T14:49:21.413-08:00@Михаил: not familiar with this mechanism. Please ...@Михаил: not familiar with this mechanism. Please start discussion on http://nuget.codeplex.com/ if you want to discuss further.David Ebbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10231048261702011658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-61200357789692880522012-11-13T22:25:11.315-08:002012-11-13T22:25:11.315-08:00As I know, assembly can set relative Private Path ...As I know, assembly can set relative Private Path in bin folder for the CLR to find assembly files.<br /><br />Any chances NuGet packages will support this feature, as alternative for the binding redirect?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16663570162194710598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-57088581607025767242012-10-23T19:45:01.264-07:002012-10-23T19:45:01.264-07:00"assembly versions rather than package versio..."assembly versions rather than package versions, but let’s assume that they match, as will usually be the case"<br /><br />While many developers may make AssemblyVersion (used in strong names) the same as AssemblyFileVersion (the version of the file), this isn't necessarily the best thing to do as you don't want restrictions to be too tight.<br /><br />In particular if you are following SemVer then patch versions should always be compatible, so for AssemblyFileVersion="2.0.1.5" you should still have AssemblyVersion="2.0.0.0".<br /><br />This would allow the two DLL file versions to be interchangeable without binding redirects (as they have the same AssemblyVersion and therefore the same strong name).<br /><br />Automatic provision of binding redirects is still useful for the cases where the assembly version does change, and it is good to see NuGet supporting SemVer.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-85645582760948189932012-02-02T12:19:42.167-08:002012-02-02T12:19:42.167-08:00Done:
http://nuget.codeplex.com/discussions/29083...Done:<br /><br />http://nuget.codeplex.com/discussions/290839<br /><br />Thank you for the reply! :)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14107377759294112206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-2931973529297196082012-02-02T11:51:57.480-08:002012-02-02T11:51:57.480-08:00Pedro: would you mind starting a thread on nuget.c...Pedro: would you mind starting a thread on nuget.codeplex.com to discuss? Blog comments can get messy and don't get any visibility from other nuget folks. Thanks! :)David Ebbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10231048261702011658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-54281832765630994342012-02-02T03:45:21.665-08:002012-02-02T03:45:21.665-08:00David, Assembly Binding Redirection works really g...David, Assembly Binding Redirection works really great... on full .NET Framework!!<br /><br />Unfortunatly, AFAIK Silverlight does not have this type of mechanism, so right now we have a huge problem with strongly signed assemblies... :(<br /><br />As an example, this is the problem right now with RestSharp and Json.net on the Windows Phone (Silverlight), as you can see here:<br /><br />https://github.com/restsharp/RestSharp/issues/187<br /><br />I opened a feature request here for Assembly Binding Redirection on Windows Phone:<br /><br />http://wpdev.uservoice.com/forums/110705-app-platform/suggestions/2511980-assembly-binding-redirection-support<br /><br />If you have any suggestion on how to overcome this problem in Windows Phone, I'd be quite happy to know about it! :)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14107377759294112206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-85308857524614733302011-02-24T10:44:57.426-08:002011-02-24T10:44:57.426-08:00@jay: could you start a discussion about this on h...@jay: could you start a discussion about this on http://nuget.codeplex.com/? It'll be either to discuss and involve others. Thanks!David Ebbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10231048261702011658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-54943368932581613492011-02-24T09:17:23.711-08:002011-02-24T09:17:23.711-08:00Nuget has a mechanism to included libraries for di...Nuget has a mechanism to included libraries for different versions of the runtime, but is there a mechanism for dependencies only needed for specific version of the runtime? <br /><br />For example you have a library that you are creating a nuspec for and it has a dependency for another library that is in nuget but is 4.0 only, but your library has been crudely backported 2.0 without that dependency. So in your lib folder it's good with net20 and net40, but without being able to specify that the dependency is only needed for 4.0 your package will fail on 2.0 because it will try to install the unnecessary dependency.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00822200688235591767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-49062109858979494372011-01-05T09:00:11.633-08:002011-01-05T09:00:11.633-08:00OpenWrap doesn't strip anything from strongly ...OpenWrap doesn't strip anything from strongly named assemblies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1310592211703201999.post-4688298877488878442011-01-05T04:00:52.246-08:002011-01-05T04:00:52.246-08:00Very enlightening and interesting. Thanks for the ...Very enlightening and interesting. Thanks for the whole series.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16407562134381962072noreply@blogger.com