Sorry for the second post (the first one is still in waiting list).
You said that you did not choose to publish two diffferent version (signed and not signed) because microsoft Does not reccomend Strong naming and .NET libraries - .NET | Microsoft Learn
Actually if you look at that article you have two big red cross at the end.
The first one states DO NOT ADD … the strong naming key : And is the rule you broke. This is an important rule because Ms explicitly tells you that whi will break compiled code.
The second one states that you should not publish two version, signed and unsigned, becuase in the long run it can ecounter type conflict. This is a decision that you can have only when you first start publishing a libary.
You told also that you have increasing demand for strongly named assembly, it is strange because it is completely unused in .NET 5 and gives you compilation warning so you are talking only of legacy code.
In the end you decided that you need to have strongly singed assembly and introducing a big breaking changes. You examined the Microsoft link with the two rules and you decided that, instead of breaking rule 2, publishing both version, that will in the long run caused problem, you instead broke rule 1, introducing an immediately breaking of compiled code.
So instead of going in the road of publishing 2 version, and maybe tell the community that we have a, lets say, 1 year deadline and after that you will be publish only signed version, you decided to immediately break compiled code, right now, without even mentioning in the release notes.
I repeat: you had two rules, you decided to break the first and most impacting one, and did’n even mention in the release notes?
Guys in all my project if I update to the latest version the code does not compile.
My 2 cents.
