Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 50 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upGitHub is where the world builds software
Millions of developers and companies build, ship, and maintain their software on GitHub — the largest and most advanced development platform in the world.
Consider signing your nuget packages #462
Open
Comments
|
Hello @brockallen, Thanks for reporting this! This issue has been added to our internal backlog to be prioritized. Pull requests and +1s on the issue summary will help it move up the backlog. With best regards, Elmer |
|
Somewhat related. You should give the assembly a strong name by signing it. As it is now, it cannot be used in a project that has a strong name. This is pretty unusual. I haven't seen a library that wasn't signed in a while. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Perhaps you should consider nuget signing:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/create-packages/sign-a-package
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/reference/signed-packages-reference
You'll get a blue checkmark in NuGet so people know it's the right package author (instead of knock-offs).