Hi all, The review kit is not quite right IMO: One must at least review the source zip or tar ball. Reviewing a checkout of the sources is useful for devs but that's not what we deliver from my understanding of Apache rules; we deliver source files (not an svn repo). Would it be possible to add to the review kit to make this distinction?
TY, Gary On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 2:08 PM Jan Friedrich <freeand...@apache.org> wrote: > > This is a vote to release the Apache Log4net 3.1.0. > > Website: https://logging.staged.apache.org/log4net/release-notes.html > GitHub: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4net > Commit: 76eb4b34f501415fef5adcee2c677f60f48651dc > Distribution: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/logging/log4net/3.1.0 > Signing key: 0x7D24496A230E29D6349A99EF583E491578F02D5D > Review kit: https://logging.staged.apache.org/log4net/release-review.html > > Please download, test, and cast your votes on this mailing list. > > [ ] +1, release the artifacts > [ ] -1, don't release, because ... > > This vote is open for 72 hours and will pass unless getting a net > negative vote count. > All votes are welcome and we encourage everyone to test the release, but > only the Logging Services PMC votes are officially counted.
