You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to log4net-dev@logging.apache.org by Kirill Temnenkov <ki...@gmail.com> on 2010/04/29 12:45:48 UTC
abandoned?
Hi!
I think that the project be abandoned. Am I right?
Can I participate in the development as a developer?
WBR,
Kirill Temnenkov
Re: abandoned?
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
Disclaimer: even though I own and use an @apache.org address I'm not a
log4net developer, only a user and interested observer - and a
contributor to a couple of other ASF projects. I don't speak for
log4net.
On 2010-04-29, Kirill Temnenkov <ki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think that the project be abandoned. Am I right?
I hope you are not - if you look at the JIRA issues those get addressed,
likewise questions on this and the user list do get answered.
Unfortunately there hasn't been any coding action in four months.
What the problem needs most IMHO is a new release (and I'd be glad to
help out if I can).
> Can I participate in the development as a developer?
Make yourself familiar with <http://logging.apache.org/guidelines.html>.
Anybody can participate by asking or answering questions, finding or
fixing bugs, suggesting or implementing new features. The preferred
channels are the mailing lists and JIRA.
In Apache projects, if you stick around long enough and provide enough
patches the committers usually get tired of applying your patches and
you become a committer yourself.
Cheers
Stefan
RE: abandoned?
Posted by Roy Chastain <Ro...@roychastain.org>.
I would love to see a new release with the current code and all
fixes/enhancements built-in. There are a couple of changes in the
change database that I would like to have, but I have never been able to
use the tools to apply them to the current codebase.
After that is completed, a new 2.x release targeting the 2.x runtime or
higher would be a great thing to have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roy Chastain
-----Original Message-----
From: Dominik Psenner [mailto:dpsenner@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 04:43
To: 'Log4NET Dev'
Subject: RE: abandoned?
You're right. But for now I would leave out the generics. It is likely
more urgent that log4net works with .NET 4.0 right now because a lot of
people (like us) plan a UI rewrite with XAML in the next few months. I
sense this as the main stream of .NET in the near future.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 10:16 AM
> To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org
> Subject: Re: abandoned?
>
> On 2010-05-03, Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But as long there are no breaking API changes needed to get log4net
> running
> > with .net4.0 I would not target it as a major release, but more or
> > less
> a
> > 1.4.x.
>
> Ron talked about taking advantage of generics in the API which would
> be a breaking change. Otherwise I agree with you that changing the
> major version shouldn't be required.
>
> Stefan
RE: abandoned?
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
You're right. But for now I would leave out the generics. It is likely more
urgent that log4net works with .NET 4.0 right now because a lot of people
(like us) plan a UI rewrite with XAML in the next few months. I sense this
as the main stream of .NET in the near future.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 10:16 AM
> To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org
> Subject: Re: abandoned?
>
> On 2010-05-03, Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But as long there are no breaking API changes needed to get log4net
> running
> > with .net4.0 I would not target it as a major release, but more or less
> a
> > 1.4.x.
>
> Ron talked about taking advantage of generics in the API which would be
> a breaking change. Otherwise I agree with you that changing the major
> version shouldn't be required.
>
> Stefan
Re: abandoned?
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2010-05-03, Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But as long there are no breaking API changes needed to get log4net running
> with .net4.0 I would not target it as a major release, but more or less a
> 1.4.x.
Ron talked about taking advantage of generics in the API which would be
a breaking change. Otherwise I agree with you that changing the major
version shouldn't be required.
Stefan
AW: abandoned?
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
Good news that maybe something is moving on. My last note regarding .net 4.0
support was never answered and just resides somewhere in the history of
February (see:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/logging-log4net-dev/201002.mbox/%3C
BC2ABB510F3F405F9BE041B89BE06916@alpin.local%3E ).
I agree with a minor release (1.3 or so) that marks the currently stable
codebase.
But as long there are no breaking API changes needed to get log4net running
with .net4.0 I would not target it as a major release, but more or less a
1.4.x.
Greetings,
d.
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
Gesendet: Montag, 3. Mai 2010 06:08
An: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org
Betreff: Re: abandoned?
On 2010-05-03, Ron Grabowski <ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I agree with getting out a small point release before a large refactor.
+1
You may even consider to change the major version with the refactoring,
i.e. release a 1.1 compatible log4net 1.2.x soon and call the .NET 2.0+
version log4net 2.x
Stefan
Re: abandoned?
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2010-05-03, Ron Grabowski <ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I agree with getting out a small point release before a large refactor.
+1
You may even consider to change the major version with the refactoring,
i.e. release a 1.1 compatible log4net 1.2.x soon and call the .NET 2.0+
version log4net 2.x
Stefan
Re: abandoned?
Posted by Ron Grabowski <ro...@yahoo.com>.
I agree with getting out a small point release before a large refactor.
----- Original Message ----
From: steven higgan <st...@gmail.com>
To: Log4NET Dev <lo...@logging.apache.org>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 10:03:47 PM
Subject: Re: abandoned?
yes please, drop 1.1 - its so.... 7 or so years ago...
before any major refactor is done to require .net 2.0 can a new
release be made, there is a lot of stuff in trunk that would heal some
pain.
cheers.
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Ron Grabowski <ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Its not dead. I read the mailing list every day and the mailing list does a
> decent job of answering questions. I think the current code base is stable
> and extensible.
>
> I had intended to get another release out to support 1.1 but I think that
> opportunity has passed now that 4.0 has been released. If we don't want to
> support 1.1 anymore we can start to migrate the code to generics and target
> .NET 2.0 as the base.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kirill Temnenkov <ki...@gmail.com>
> To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, April 29, 2010 6:45:48 AM
> Subject: abandoned?
>
> Hi!
> I think that the project be abandoned. Am I right?
> Can I participate in the development as a developer?
>
> WBR,
> Kirill Temnenkov
>
Re: abandoned?
Posted by steven higgan <st...@gmail.com>.
yes please, drop 1.1 - its so.... 7 or so years ago...
before any major refactor is done to require .net 2.0 can a new
release be made, there is a lot of stuff in trunk that would heal some
pain.
cheers.
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Ron Grabowski <ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Its not dead. I read the mailing list every day and the mailing list does a
> decent job of answering questions. I think the current code base is stable
> and extensible.
>
> I had intended to get another release out to support 1.1 but I think that
> opportunity has passed now that 4.0 has been released. If we don't want to
> support 1.1 anymore we can start to migrate the code to generics and target
> .NET 2.0 as the base.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kirill Temnenkov <ki...@gmail.com>
> To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, April 29, 2010 6:45:48 AM
> Subject: abandoned?
>
> Hi!
> I think that the project be abandoned. Am I right?
> Can I participate in the development as a developer?
>
> WBR,
> Kirill Temnenkov
>
Re: abandoned?
Posted by Ron Grabowski <ro...@yahoo.com>.
Its not dead. I read the mailing list every day and the mailing list does a decent job of answering questions. I think the current code base is stable and extensible.
I had intended to get another release out to support 1.1 but I think that opportunity has passed now that 4.0 has been released. If we don't want to support 1.1 anymore we can start to migrate the code to generics and target .NET 2.0 as the base.
________________________________
From: Kirill Temnenkov <ki...@gmail.com>
To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org
Sent: Thu, April 29, 2010 6:45:48 AM
Subject: abandoned?
Hi!
I
think that the project be abandoned. Am I right?
Can I participate in the development as a developer?
WBR,
Kirill Temnenkov