My +1 Dominic, if you are going to vote you need to do it formally.
Ralph > On Sep 10, 2020, at 12:57 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Knowing that those changes are intentional I am confident that the next > release is better than the last. This is reason enough to move on. If > something breaks we can still address those issues with another future > release. > -- > Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find > them. > >> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 09:20 Davyd McColl <dav...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Dominik >> >> I have had a long look over the changes (both via the PR and locally, as I >> contributed to help with some infra changes) and I'm happy -- there's been >> a lot of clean-up and simplification and in addition, tests are now run >> against all targets -- so that's a good thing. Some of these changes are >> required to resolve issues for netstandard2.0 users who have upgraded to >> 2.0.9. Community member NicholasNoise put in a lot of work on this. >> >> If it helps, the original PR is here: >> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4net/pull/63 -- it makes viewing >> changes a lot simpler. Changes to a lot of the #ifdefs are updates from >> NETSTANDARD1_3 to simply NETSTANDARD as many of the changes required for >> netstandard2.0 are compatible. I contributed on that PR too, mainly around >> getting build to work as expected. >> >> You're welcome to use the npm-based build / test pipeline to verify: I've >> just updated master to automatically test across all platforms when running >> `npm test`, so it should be easy to verify that all things are functional: >> - install node if you don't have it yet (I suggest via nvm) >> - `npm ci` >> - `npm test` >> >> (assuming that you have all the required build targets -- there are helper >> .ps1 scripts to get the older targets -- netcore 1.1 and netfx35) >> >> -d >> >> >> On 2020/09/10 09:03:45, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi >> >> Sorry to not have responded earlier. Time is short and the days are busy. I >> looked at the diff and found several suspicious changes. Several hundred >> ifdefs have been removed/replaced along with tests. Therefore I have a bad >> feeling about those changes without further careful checking. I propose to >> release the cve fix alone and follow up a second release as soon as someone >> had the time to verify that the netstandard2 changes are ok. >> >> Best regards >> -- >> Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find >> them. >> >>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 08:48 Davyd McColl wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> Sorry to be a bother, but I haven't heard anything back on this apart >> from >>> Dominik's inquiry into netstandard 1.3 support. I'd really like to get >> this >>> out as: >>> a) it contains the CVE fix that has been asked about so much >>> b) it solves some issues affecting netstandard users >>> >>> Thanks >>> -d >>> >>>> On 2020/09/06 20:51:38, Davyd McColl wrote: >>> Hi all >>> >>> I'd like to propose a vote to release 2.0.10 of log4net, with: >>> - updated netstandard 2.0 support from community member NicholasNoise >>> - cherry-picked fix for CVE-2018-1285 (I had to modify slightly since the >>> mechanism used there is outdated for netstandard 2.0, but the principle >>> stands >>> >>> I've created an RC release at GitHub: >>> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4net/releases/tag/v2.0.10-rc1 and >>> pushed updated site material to the `asf-staging` branch of the >>> logging-log4net-site repo. >>> >>> Thanks >>> -d >>
