Why does createXap.bat default to Silverlight 2?

Topics: Prism v4 - Silverlight 4
Aug 11, 2010 at 4:46 AM

In the new Prism 4.0 CTP why does Composite.Silverlight.Tests\Mocks\Modules\createXap.bat try for Silverlight 2, then 3, then 4 rather than the other way around? I changed the file to reverse the order and it all worked fine! everything else seems to expect .Net 4 and Silverlight 4, so why not this?

Aug 11, 2010 at 2:10 PM
This discussion has been copied to a work item. Click here to go to the work item and continue the discussion.
Aug 11, 2010 at 2:13 PM

Hi,

Thanks for reporting that. First of all take into account that it is not the final version of Prism v4. As for the order, it should not impact since it is not possible to install two different version of Silverlight side by side. That said, it seems that this logic should work fine with the original order as well as with your approach.

Therefore, as this could be something valuable to take into account in future versions, I have copied this discussion to a work item. You can find it here.

Please let me know if this helps.

Fernando Antivero
http://blogs.southworks.net/fantivero

Aug 11, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Fernando,

That’s fine. I appreciate this is not the final version, which is why I thought it simply worth a comment. I’ve been waiting for this version with MEF support and must say that I’m not disappointed – great job!

I’ve attached my modified version for you in case it helps with the work item.

Regards,

Nigel Page

E: nigelp@synteca.com | H: +61 (3) 9801 8099 | M: +61 416 106 619 | IM: nigelpage@hotmail.com

From: fantivero [mailto:notifications@codeplex.com]
Sent: Thursday, 12 August 2010 12:13 AM
To: nigelp@synteca.com
Subject: Re: Why does createXap.bat default to Silverlight 2? [CompositeWPF:223153]

From: fantivero

Hi,

Thanks for reporting that. First of all take into account that it is not the final version of Prism v4. As for the order, it should not impact since it is not possible to install two different version of Silverlight side by side. That said, it seems that this logic should work fine with the original order as well as with your approach.

Therefore, as this could be something valuable to take into account in future versions, I have copied this discussion to a work item. You can find it here.

Please let me know if this helps.

Fernando Antivero
http://blogs.southworks.net/fantivero

Read the full discussion online.

To add a post to this discussion, reply to this email (CompositeWPF@discussions.codeplex.com)

To start a new discussion for this project, email CompositeWPF@discussions.codeplex.com

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this discussion on CodePlex. You can unsubscribe on CodePlex.com.

Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at CodePlex.com