Another log4j 1.3 alpha?

[Curt Arnold <ca...@houston.rr.com>]

log4j-1.3-alpha-6 is getting a little stale, but we have not made any  
progress on cleaning up the API to release anything that I'd feel  
comfortable calling a beta.  Any thoughts about releasing another  
alpha in conjunction with upcoming log4j 1.2.12?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

RE: Another log4j 1.3 alpha?

[Mark Womack <wo...@adobe.com>]

I'll do another build of 1.3 alpha when we rc 1.2.12.  Any 1.2 changes
should be moved to the main branch before then, to keep them in sync.

I think we should continue with the alpha designation until we have reviewed
the api's and feel that they are "frozen".

And the 1.2.12 stuff should not stop anyone from looking at the bugs related
to 1.3.

-Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Curt Arnold [mailto:carnold@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:20 PM
> To: Log4J Developers List
> Subject: Re: Another log4j 1.3 alpha?
> 
> 
> On Jul 22, 2005, at 6:36 PM, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > I think we're being a little conservative: call the next one a
> > beta, and
> > hopefully we'll get more user testing and feedback ;)  But either
> > way a new
> > build is welcome.
> 
> As long as beta does not imply that the API is frozen, I'd be willing
> to call it that.  Especially if we included a list of things that
> were likely to change.  However, there are a lot of new and changed
> API that should be reviewed before locking it down.
> 
> It does need a vote and the PMC needs to be the final arbiter of what
> Logging Services releases, but I don't see why we can't do concurrent
> log4j-dev and PMC votes until we can streamline the bylaws.  Announce
> the vote on both the PMC list and the log4j-dev list and have all
> voting on the log4j-dev list, count all the votes from the log4j-
> committers and then all the votes from the PMC members.  Hard to
> imagine a scenario where they'd differ.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

Re: Another log4j 1.3 alpha?

[Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org>]

On Jul 22, 2005, at 6:36 PM, Yoav Shapira wrote:

> Hi,
> I think we're being a little conservative: call the next one a  
> beta, and
> hopefully we'll get more user testing and feedback ;)  But either  
> way a new
> build is welcome.

As long as beta does not imply that the API is frozen, I'd be willing  
to call it that.  Especially if we included a list of things that  
were likely to change.  However, there are a lot of new and changed  
API that should be reviewed before locking it down.

It does need a vote and the PMC needs to be the final arbiter of what  
Logging Services releases, but I don't see why we can't do concurrent  
log4j-dev and PMC votes until we can streamline the bylaws.  Announce  
the vote on both the PMC list and the log4j-dev list and have all  
voting on the log4j-dev list, count all the votes from the log4j- 
committers and then all the votes from the PMC members.  Hard to  
imagine a scenario where they'd differ.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

RE: Another log4j 1.3 alpha?

[Yoav Shapira <yo...@MIT.EDU>]

Hi,
I think we're being a little conservative: call the next one a beta, and
hopefully we'll get more user testing and feedback ;)  But either way a new
build is welcome.  

The way we've been doing the release votes is duplicitous and slow: there
should be one vote, here on log4j-dev, and it should be short as in 72 hours
from start to finish.  But yes, we need a vote even for alpha/beta/rcs.

Yoav Shapira
System Design and Management Fellow
MIT Sloan School of Management
Cambridge, MA
yoavs@computer.org / yoavsh@sloan.mit.edu

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Womack [mailto:womack@adobe.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 7:22 PM
> To: 'Log4J Developers List'
> Subject: RE: Another log4j 1.3 alpha?
> 
> Yep.  I think it would be a good thing.  Do we have to go through the
> whole
> committer release vote, PMC release vote?  It is not a "final" release of
> the version, just an alpha...
> 
> -Mark
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Curt Arnold [mailto:carnold@houston.rr.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 4:17 PM
> > To: Log4J Developers List
> > Subject: Another log4j 1.3 alpha?
> >
> > log4j-1.3-alpha-6 is getting a little stale, but we have not made any
> > progress on cleaning up the API to release anything that I'd feel
> > comfortable calling a beta.  Any thoughts about releasing another
> > alpha in conjunction with upcoming log4j 1.2.12?
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

RE: Another log4j 1.3 alpha?

[Mark Womack <wo...@adobe.com>]

Yep.  I think it would be a good thing.  Do we have to go through the whole
committer release vote, PMC release vote?  It is not a "final" release of
the version, just an alpha...

-Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Curt Arnold [mailto:carnold@houston.rr.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 4:17 PM
> To: Log4J Developers List
> Subject: Another log4j 1.3 alpha?
> 
> log4j-1.3-alpha-6 is getting a little stale, but we have not made any
> progress on cleaning up the API to release anything that I'd feel
> comfortable calling a beta.  Any thoughts about releasing another
> alpha in conjunction with upcoming log4j 1.2.12?
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org