On Jan 13, 2008 2:12 PM, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [moved from maven-dev] > > On Jan 11, 2008 4:08 PM, Shane Isbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So to support this we need to recompile the NUnit assembly with the > version > > in the filename. There is no modification of code, just a changing on > > manifest attributes and the artifact filename. NUnit includes their key > for > > signing within the build source, but I tend to think we should use our > own > > key so that people can verify the source of the assembly. > > Does this really require re-compiling, or just re-packaging with > changes to the manifest? IOW, must you have access to the source code > to do this, or can you just explode the dll, edit a text file, and > package it up again?
Technically, this is possible but would require more work than a recompile since the assembly is not an archive. We would have to disassemble the assembly, change metadata, reassemble and then sign it. > > > I thought the last discussions about requiring the version number in > the filename or not went the other way, and it was _not_ going to be > required. This is the long term direction but but not something that NMaven should be handling. I would expect that such changes will need to be made within Maven core. However, there is support for system scope, which will allow the user to include any assembly (with or without versions in the filename) located on the file system. Shane > > > -- > Wendy >
