[Mono-list] Some questions about shared assemlies, strong names...

[Fergus Henderson]

On 03-May-2003, Paolo Molaro <lupus@ximian.com> wrote:
> The strong name is useful for 1% of the
> cases, but I think it doesn't fit the world of free software very well.
> Strong names are based on the concept of having a secret key and that of
> course doesn't match with source availability. And if you distribute the
> private key, 99% of the reason for having a strong name becomes moot
> and hence useless.

I don't agree.  Having a strong name with a publically-distributed
"private" key is still useful for dealing with name clashes.
IMHO that is about 50% of the reason for using strong names, not 1%.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.