Recently, the Log4Net team released log4net 1.2.11 (congrats by the way!). The previous version of log4Net was 1.2.10.
Despite which version of version you subscribe to, we can all agree that only incrementing the third part of a version indicates that the new release is a minor update and one that hopefully has no breaking changes. Perhaps a bug fix release.
SemVer is a convention for versioning your public APIs that gives meaning to the version number. Each version has three parts, Major.Minor.Patch.
In brief, these correspond to:
- Major: Breaking changes.
- Minor: New features, but backwards compatible.
- Patch: Backwards compatible bug fixes only.
Given that the Patch number is supposed to represent bug fixes only, NuGet chooses the minimum Major and Minor version of a package to meet the dependency contstraint, but the maximum Patch version. David Ebbo describes the algorithm and rationale in part 2 of his three part series on NuGet Versioning.
Strong Names and Versioning
The consequence of this is as follows. With the new log4Net release, if you have a package that has log4net 1.2.10 or greater as a dependency:
<dependency id="log4net" version="1.2.10" />
Installing that package would give you log4net 1.2.11. In most cases, this is what you want because the newer release might have important bug fixes such as security fixes.
However, in this case, Log4Net changed the strong name for their assembly for 1.2.11. Whatever your feelings about using strong names or not (that’s a separate discussion), the fact is that if you choose to use them, changing the strong name is changing the identity of your assembly. That’s a major breaking change.
And man, were a lot of people affected! We heard from tons of folks who were broken by this and unsure how to fix it.
NuGet does support a workaround so that you can prevent inadvertent upgrades. You can constrain the allowed versions of an installed package by manually modifying packages.config. Sadly, we don’t yet have a UI for this, so it’s a bit of a pain.
Apart from never changing your strong name, the solution in this case is to treat this change as a major breaking change and increment the major version number of the assembly.
I don’t anticipate the Log4Net team will change the version of their assembly, but I reached out to the maintainer of the Log4Net package (no connection to the Log4Net team so please don’t give him grief about this) and he graciously incremented the major version of the Log4Net package to solve the problem.
Just to be clear, the log4net 2.0 NuGet package contains the log4net 1.2.11 assembly.
While it’s generally good form to have the package and assembly version match to avoid confusion, it’s not necessary. This is a good example of a case where they need to differ. I do suggest having the “Title” and “Description” note this fact to help avoid further confusion.
I want to thank Jiri for maintaining the Log4Net package and being responsive to the need out there! It’s much appreciated.