Two things which would be interessting

Apr 26, 2010 at 8:15 AM

Hey,

I have two feature requests.

- strong name signing for at least released binaries
- add the changeset number to the description of the binary somehow automated (e.g. AssemblyDescription => "Changeset: 2399d3359488")

What do you think?

Ciao Ephraim

Coordinator
Apr 26, 2010 at 11:38 PM

Hi Ephraim,

The main library should already be signed in released builds.

I'll look at branding the builds with the changeset - shouldn't be too hard.

Also, I'm looking at having the file version increment each time I release, so upgrades work in .msi files.  The assembly version will stay constant - so 0.8.0.0 for all releases of 0.8, 0.9.0.0 for all releases of 0.9, etc.

Cheers,

Ken

Apr 27, 2010 at 1:23 PM

Hey Ken,

thanks. The branding would be neat! I think a checkin trigger might do the trick.

Ciao Ephraim

 

Coordinator
Apr 28, 2010 at 9:34 PM

Hi Ephraim,

I've uploaded a preview of the 0.9 release that has been branded (http://discutils.codeplex.com/releases/view/44240)

The file version is derived from the build time, so should help differentiate builds.  AssemblyDescription also contains the mercurial revision that was build, per your suggestion.

Cheers,

Ken

Apr 29, 2010 at 6:58 AM

Hey Ken,

super! Thanks a lot. Will try it out!