=== relates to: S2226

=== on 21 Nov 2014, 14:49:45 Freddy Mallet wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] we should forget the technical difficulty to implement rules. If we really do that, this rule should become"A static field should never be updated from a thread". Because if the rule is really ""public static" fields should be "readonly"" we're going to generate a big amount of false positives

=== on 21 Nov 2014, 14:51:26 Freddy Mallet wrote:
And as soon as we're talking about multi-threading issue, the "multi-threading" tag should be used.

=== on 28 May 2015, 12:00:52 Tamas Vajk wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] I rewrote this rule to match the description here: \https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms182353.aspx


The main idea is the same, ``++public static++`` fields should be either ``++const++`` or ``++readonly++``.

=== on 28 May 2015, 14:29:44 Tamas Vajk wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2], could you go through the description?

=== on 28 May 2015, 15:47:38 Ann Campbell wrote:
the description looks fine [~tamas.vajk]. Could you revert the code samples too, please?

=== on 29 May 2015, 07:15:30 Tamas Vajk wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2], the code samples were written by me, there is no need to revert them.

=== on 29 May 2015, 14:51:32 Ann Campbell wrote:
Cool. Thanks [~tamas.vajk]

=== on 1 Jun 2015, 15:02:42 Tamas Vajk wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] I've changed the severity to major, it shouldn't be critical IMO

=== on 1 Jun 2015, 17:10:22 Ann Campbell wrote:
that's fine [~tamas.vajk]



