On 2011-10-12, Curt Arnold wrote: > On Oct 11, 2011, at 4:02 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On 2011-10-11, Curt Arnold wrote: >>> both bin/2.0/release/log4net.dll and bin/3.5/release/log4net.dll >>> describe themselves as Apache log4net for the .NET Framework >>> 2.0. Everybody else has the expected application description. >> Those two DLLs are the same file as there currently is no difference >> between the 2.0 and 3.5 builds. Maybe I shouldn't have created the 3.5 >> version at all. > I believe they were not binary identical, but that could have been > timestamps or other insignificant differences. They have been compiled separately so yes, there will be differences in timestamps. >>> doc/index.html refers to log4j and not Apache log4j. >> It uses Apache log4net three times before using the shorter version, I >> think that's OK. > It does describe log4net as Apache log4net appropriately but it does > not describe log4j as Apache log4j. I somehow missed you were talking about log4*j* - will fix that in trunk and update the site later today. >>> doc/index.html refers to the .NET runtime. The Microsoft .NET >>> trademark guidelines are at >>> http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/IntellectualProperty/Trademarks/Usage/Net.aspx. >>> At >>> least we should have a Microsoft(r) .NET at the first menion. >> Will fix that - for the site as well. This likely affects other pages >> as well. > I think the guidelines might have become looser recently. I think at > one time you would have to describe it as for the Common Language > Runtime and could not refer to the Microsoft(r) .NET Framework. The site I've just deployed should be OK - not visible, yet. > Frequent releases what a concept. 8-) No promises, though. Stefan
