Signed assembly

Feb 28, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Javier, any chance you'd consider strong-name signing the assembly?

Mar 2, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Mike, I came across the idea some time ago. String-naming an assembly could be beneficial if you really need it (such us if you registering your DLL for COM+ applications), but on some other cases it might be a pain with no workaround.

Let me ask you, why do you need it signed?

Mar 2, 2012 at 10:50 PM
All of my assemblies in my application are signed which means all dependent assemblies must also be signed. For now I'm just rebuilding and signing your stuff, but if I could just pull a binary from nuget life would be so much better :)

On Mar 2, 2012, at 10:43 AM, "javiercanillas" <notifications@codeplex.com<mailto:notifications@codeplex.com>> wrote:


From: javiercanillas

Mike, I came across the idea some time ago. String-naming an assembly could be beneficial if you really need it (such us if you registering your DLL for COM+ applications), but on some other cases it might be a pain with no workaround.

Let me ask you, why do you need it signed?

Read the full discussion online<http://perfmoncounterhelper.codeplex.com/discussions/346593#post804567>.

To add a post to this discussion, reply to this email ([email removed]<mailto:[email removed]?subject=[PerfmonCounterHelper:346593]>)

To start a new discussion for this project, email [email removed]<mailto:[email removed]>

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this discussion on CodePlex. You can unsubscribe<https://perfmoncounterhelper.codeplex.com/discussions/346593/unsubscribe/> on CodePlex.com<http://CodePlex.com>.

Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at CodePlex.com<http://CodePlex.com>