Re: [VOTE] Release log4net 2.0.6 based on RC1

Many thanks for reviewing

On 2016-12-22, Gary Gregory wrote:

> Running build.cmd succeeds. ASC, MD5, SHA1, SHA256 OK. If you are going to
> provide SHA1 or SHA256, you can do away with MD5 IMO.

> -1 based on the RAT check failures:
> 18 Unknown Licenses

most of them are generated, namely

>   bin/net/2.0/debug/log4net.xml
>   bin/net/2.0/release/log4net.xml
>   bin/net/3.5/debug/log4net.xml
>   bin/net/3.5/release/log4net.xml
>   bin/net/4.0/debug/log4net.xml
>   bin/net/4.0/release/log4net.xml
>   bin/net/4.5/debug/log4net.xml
>   bin/net/4.5/release/log4net.xml
>   bin/net-cp/3.5/debug/log4net.xml
>   bin/net-cp/3.5/release/log4net.xml
>   bin/net-cp/4.0/debug/log4net.xml
>   bin/net-cp/4.0/release/log4net.xml
>   src/GeneratedAssemblyInfo.cs

the next files are JSON files and you can't have comments in JSON

>   netstandard/global.json
>   netstandard/log4net/project.json
>   netstandard/log4net.tests/project.json

which leaves the remaining files

>   log4net.snk.readme
>   tests/lib/prerequisites.txt

which are readmes.

See also
http://stefan.samaflost.de/staging/log4net-2.0.6/rat-report.html and
https://github.com/apache/log4net/blob/trunk/pom.xml#L136

> It would help to have a BUILDING.txt file to guide reviewers.

http://stefan.samaflost.de/staging/log4net-2.0.6/release/building.html

Cheers

        Stefan