Manually overriding AssemblyInfo and ability to specify friendly assemblies

[Evan Worley <ev...@gmail.com>]

I have two questions both regarding the flexibility of the AssemblyInfo that
is generated for C# artifacts.

1)  Is there a way to specify a hand-coded AssemblyInfo for an artifact?  I
know this would be problematic due to version consistency etc, but if
someone wanted to manually manage the complexity, could they?

2) Is there any thoughts about adding "friendly assembly" entries into an
artifacts pom?  e.g. A lists B as a friendly artifact which causes NMaven to
add a friendly assembly entry into
A's AssemblyInfo which enables B to access the protected members of A.

If neither 1 or 2 are supported, I would vote for adding a JIRA for #2.  I
would like to have the AssemblyInfo generated as it prevents certain
mismatch errors.  We will just need to ensure that we have configuration
support for all needed AssemblyInfo constructs.

Thoughts?

Re: Manually overriding AssemblyInfo and ability to specify friendly assemblies

[Evan Worley <ev...@gmail.com>]

Good to know on #1, and I had the same thoughts on #2.  So I guess we can
add that support when it is needed.

Thanks,
Evan

On 6/18/07, Shane Isbell <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (1) is supported: if the src directory already contains an AssemblyInfo
> class, then the AssemblyInfoGeneratorMojo class instance will not generate
> one.
>
> (2) is not supported but could be done by adding parameters (list of
> Friendly IDs/Public Keys) to the maven-compile-plugin, which
> the AssemblyInfoGeneratorMojo would process.
>
> Shane
>
> On 6/18/07, Evan Worley <ev...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I have two questions both regarding the flexibility of the AssemblyInfo
> > that
> > is generated for C# artifacts.
> >
> > 1)  Is there a way to specify a hand-coded AssemblyInfo for an
> > artifact?  I
> > know this would be problematic due to version consistency etc, but if
> > someone wanted to manually manage the complexity, could they?
> >
> > 2) Is there any thoughts about adding "friendly assembly" entries into
> an
> > artifacts pom?  e.g. A lists B as a friendly artifact which causes
> NMaven
> > to
> > add a friendly assembly entry into
> > A's AssemblyInfo which enables B to access the protected members of A.
> >
> > If neither 1 or 2 are supported, I would vote for adding a JIRA for
> #2.  I
> > would like to have the AssemblyInfo generated as it prevents certain
> > mismatch errors.  We will just need to ensure that we have configuration
> > support for all needed AssemblyInfo constructs.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
>

Re: Manually overriding AssemblyInfo and ability to specify friendly assemblies

[Shane Isbell <sh...@gmail.com>]

(1) is supported: if the src directory already contains an AssemblyInfo
class, then the AssemblyInfoGeneratorMojo class instance will not generate
one.

(2) is not supported but could be done by adding parameters (list of
Friendly IDs/Public Keys) to the maven-compile-plugin, which
the AssemblyInfoGeneratorMojo would process.

Shane

On 6/18/07, Evan Worley <ev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have two questions both regarding the flexibility of the AssemblyInfo
> that
> is generated for C# artifacts.
>
> 1)  Is there a way to specify a hand-coded AssemblyInfo for an
> artifact?  I
> know this would be problematic due to version consistency etc, but if
> someone wanted to manually manage the complexity, could they?
>
> 2) Is there any thoughts about adding "friendly assembly" entries into an
> artifacts pom?  e.g. A lists B as a friendly artifact which causes NMaven
> to
> add a friendly assembly entry into
> A's AssemblyInfo which enables B to access the protected members of A.
>
> If neither 1 or 2 are supported, I would vote for adding a JIRA for #2.  I
> would like to have the AssemblyInfo generated as it prevents certain
> mismatch errors.  We will just need to ensure that we have configuration
> support for all needed AssemblyInfo constructs.
>
> Thoughts?
>