PIA signed by Interwoven, or lack there of...

System

Primary Interop Assemblies should always be signed by the publisher (Interwoven), not your customers.

Imagine this scenario:

My company's developer1 creates an interop assembly and references it with app A.
My company's developer2 creates an interop assembly and references it with app B.
App A tries to pass an object to App B or App B tries to pass an object to App A.
Type mismatch errors everywhere.

Documentum's Foundation Classes are in Java, yet they supply a COM dll and .NET PIA. They are also working on a straight .NET data provider. Come on Interwoven, your .Net support is really lacking. By now you should be working on a straight .Net implementation of the IManage.dll, but at least get your act together and create a Primary Interop Assembly.

neilm

Good points, well made!

Can we have an official Interwoven response to this post with a time scale for the availability of PIAs for WorkSite dlls - assuming they are not yet available.

In addition to the issues with the absence of PIAs outlined in the earlier post there are further problems on the horizon. We are planning our move to Visual Studio 2005 which (for good reasons of its own) makes the signing of 3rd party Interop assemblies much more difficult. The absence of WorkSite PIAs will be contributary factor in delaying our move to VS 2005.

Any comments?

Neil M

Edited by neilm on 01/27/05 01:20 AM (server time).