You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org> on 2003/02/01 19:56:41 UTC
[ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
We need to focus on the task at hand. That is specifically, the
release of LogKit. Throwing in Deprecation policies into the mix
and other stuff as well is not helping.
#1) We focus on LogKit and answering the problems associated with
its release.
#2) We do a quick lessons learned, and if we need to adjust anything
else, we do it.
As to point #1:
Do we release LogKit 2.0, which essentially removes *all* deprecated
classes and methods? Or do we release LogKit 1.1 which adds all the
LF5 classes and leave the deprecated ones alone.
If we go for LogKit 2.0 I can commit what I have which removes all
deprecated classes.
We will *wait* on converting to Maven until after they release the
next version. That means we do not do any changes to the build system
at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>a 1.1 release of LogKit (basically equivalent to CVS HEAD + update
>>to Log4J version, and adding a 1.1 tag) following by an immediate
>>cleanup of LogKit HEAD through removal of the deprecated content,
>>tag the update as 2.0 and relase under 2.0.
>>
>>
>
>A little odd (in that v2.0 doesn't add anything, just removes), but do-able.
>
What was that expression - "less is more"?
>Any plans to add support to LogKit v2 for such things as log rotation
>policies, etc., to all be dynamically reconfigurable?
>
>
I personnaly would like to see effort focussed on a unified logging
solution under which LogKit 2.0 is the last of the LogKit line and
instead integration/synchronization with Log4J and others.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> a 1.1 release of LogKit (basically equivalent to CVS HEAD + update
> to Log4J version, and adding a 1.1 tag) following by an immediate
> cleanup of LogKit HEAD through removal of the deprecated content,
> tag the update as 2.0 and relase under 2.0.
A little odd (in that v2.0 doesn't add anything, just removes), but do-able.
Any plans to add support to LogKit v2 for such things as log rotation
policies, etc., to all be dynamically reconfigurable?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Berin Loritsch wrote:
> We need to focus on the task at hand. That is specifically, the
> release of LogKit. Throwing in Deprecation policies into the mix
> and other stuff as well is not helping.
>
> #1) We focus on LogKit and answering the problems associated with
> its release.
>
> #2) We do a quick lessons learned, and if we need to adjust anything
> else, we do it.
>
>
> As to point #1:
>
> Do we release LogKit 2.0, which essentially removes *all* deprecated
> classes and methods? Or do we release LogKit 1.1 which adds all the
> LF5 classes and leave the deprecated ones alone.
>
> If we go for LogKit 2.0 I can commit what I have which removes all
> deprecated classes.
Berin:
What is the problem with doing both?
A couple of people have raised concerns about elinating the deprecated
classes and methods. This can be addressed by doing a 1.1 release of
LogKit (basically equivalent to CVS HEAD + update to Log4J version, and
adding a 1.1 tag) following by an immediate cleanup of LogKit HEAD
through removal of the deprecated content, tag the update as 2.0 and
relase under 2.0.
CHeers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Leo,
> > LogKit 1.1.1 would be the "real" version, and LogKit v2 would be a
cleaned
> > up version that no one (including A4 code releases) should be using.
> so don't release it :D
The only reason for it is because Berin wants to start cleaning things up.
Avalon 4 can't remove deprecated classes. Avalon 5 may be different enough
that it makes sense to remove deprecated classes, at which point A5 could
use LogKit 2.
As for LogKit v2, until there are compelling reasons to use it (e.g., JMX
support for dynamic reconfiguration of the log at runtime), why use it?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Leo,
>
>>I'm -1 on a non-backwards-compatible LogKit 2.0 on the grounds of
>>removal of deprecated material. It inflicts way too much pain on the
>>userbase at zero net benefit.
>
> LogKit 1.1.1 would be the "real" version, and LogKit v2 would be a cleaned
> up version that no one (including A4 code releases) should be using.
so don't release it :D
> Stephen seems to think that LogKit has some changes that go into v2 to work
> better with other loggers, but after that he seems to suggest that it reachs
> EOL.
that, I don't have an opinion on at all yet. What changes? (don't read
your e-mail for three days and you get lost immediately!) Nevertheless,
I'll probably say "keep 'em on hold for a while"...
cheers,
- Leo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Leo,
> I'm -1 on a non-backwards-compatible LogKit 2.0 on the grounds of
> removal of deprecated material. It inflicts way too much pain on the
> userbase at zero net benefit.
LogKit 1.1.1 would be the "real" version, and LogKit v2 would be a cleaned
up version that no one (including A4 code releases) should be using.
Stephen seems to think that LogKit has some changes that go into v2 to work
better with other loggers, but after that he seems to suggest that it reachs
EOL.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Do we release LogKit 2.0, which essentially removes *all* deprecated
> classes and methods? Or do we release LogKit 1.1 which adds all the
> LF5 classes and leave the deprecated ones alone.
http://apache.cs.uu.nl/dist/avalon/logkit/v1.1/
(yes, we're being mirrored through
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/avalon/ :D)
you mean logkit 1.1.1 :D
I'm -1 on a non-backwards-compatible LogKit 2.0 on the grounds of
removal of deprecated material. It inflicts way too much pain on the
userbase at zero net benefit.
cheers!
- Leo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [ATTENTION] Too many brands on the fire!
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 05:56, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Do we release LogKit 2.0, which essentially removes *all* deprecated
> classes and methods?
Is there any practical reason or just academic purity?
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Religion is what the common people see as true, the |
| wise people see as false, and the rulers see as |
| useful" --Seneca |
*------------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org