[chainsaw] Status change?

[Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org>]

Hello

we have had Chainsaw for a long time in our product list, and I can totally see that some - myself included - are emotionally attached to it. However, due to my work on it, I have given it some additional thought.

After working with the Chainsaw code base for a while, I saw that many features were commented out and removed when migrating to Log4j 2. 

Some basic features, such as "Open Logfile to view it directly." were removed. It is already hard to recover the functionality since log4j-extras no longer exists. In addition, as I learned recently, Log4j 2 has removed the XML Formatter. The old implementation of Chainsaw could only open XML-formatted log files.

Honestly, there is much work to make Chainsaw a working product again. I mostly did refactorings and clean-ups, but I am not even through. I could continue like this for two more months.

Restoring the old functionality and making it functional again requires even more months. 
If we had completed it, we would have restored a Swing application, mostly replaced by Kibana stacks.

At this point, I don't see how we can write the tons of code necessary, and also not how useful it would be. Either all our users are using Log4j 1, or we don't have any users at all for Chainsaw, since it didn't work.

For that reason, I would like to propose to move Chainsaw to dormant. If we feel for it, we can work and fix it - we should not archive the repo. But I would like to make clear that Chainsaw is not in good shape, and people should only use it only "at their own risk."

I would like to make clear that this proposal is not something I say easily, but I feel it is in the best interest of our users to communicate how we currently see the status of this project.

Please note, that I don't have much time to continue to work on it in the next months. 

Remembering the last discussion about this: Scott, are you OK with that move? I know it's your baby, but as long as we don't have a working product, we should move it. I am open to moving it back when we somehow get rid of all the problems.

Please let me know if one of you has an alternate proposal - we can also discuss it in the next call.

Kind regards,
Christian

--
The Apache Software Foundation
V.P., Data Privacy

Re: [chainsaw] Status change?

[Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>]

If Scott is +1 then let’s start a vote thread for this.

Ralph

> On Feb 7, 2024, at 8:56 AM, Robert Middleton <rm...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> While I agree that it can be useful, it was never really in a state
> where it is.  I think it has a lot of good ideas, but to make it more
> modern and practical it needs to have a much better workflow.
> 
> I may mess around with it more at some point, but it would take a lot
> to be practical.
> 
> If there is a concerted effort in the future to improve it by people
> who do find it useful, I would definitely be open to looking at it
> again.
> 
> -Robert Middleton
> 
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 2:56 AM Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>> Allow me to make some corrections:
>> 
>> `XmlLayout` is dropped in Log4j 3, not in Log4j 2.
>> 
>> Logstash (the L in the ELK, Elasticsearch-Logstash-Kibana, stack) supports
>> reading logs from a file formatted using a particular pattern. You combine
>> Filebeat with grok filter
>> <https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/logstash/current/advanced-pipeline.html>
>> to achieve that.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 5:19 AM Scott Deboy <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Thank you for spending time working on it Christian.
>>> 
>>> I started contributing to Chainsaw in 2003. I agree. It's time.
>>> 
>>> The primary benefit of Chainsaw was its built-in support for real-time
>>> tailing of ssh-accessible pattern-layout based logs  - something
>>> Kibana doesn't support well, and something no-one ever really
>>> understood about it.
>>> 
>>> It was always a dev-focused tool - it works great for local dev, and
>>> works in some prod envs, if you spend enough time to get the setup to
>>> work.
>>> 
>>> There was no great reason to move off of the log41 deps really - they
>>> aren't used for anything other than parsing the patternlayout, but
>>> log4j1 is dead, so I get it.
>>> 
>>> I use it for my work, and will continue to do so, but the
>>> chainsaw-with-log4j1-dep branch. I may revert master back to that,
>>> because why not.
>>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> Thanks again for putting up with my persistence to try and make it
>>> useful to folks - I appreciate it  :)
>>> 
>>> Scott
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 2/6/24, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Hello
>>>> 
>>>> we have had Chainsaw for a long time in our product list, and I can
>>> totally
>>>> see that some - myself included - are emotionally attached to it.
>>> However,
>>>> due to my work on it, I have given it some additional thought.
>>>> 
>>>> After working with the Chainsaw code base for a while, I saw that many
>>>> features were commented out and removed when migrating to Log4j 2.
>>>> 
>>>> Some basic features, such as "Open Logfile to view it directly." were
>>>> removed. It is already hard to recover the functionality since
>>> log4j-extras
>>>> no longer exists. In addition, as I learned recently, Log4j 2 has removed
>>>> the XML Formatter. The old implementation of Chainsaw could only open
>>>> XML-formatted log files.
>>>> 
>>>> Honestly, there is much work to make Chainsaw a working product again. I
>>>> mostly did refactorings and clean-ups, but I am not even through. I could
>>>> continue like this for two more months.
>>>> 
>>>> Restoring the old functionality and making it functional again requires
>>> even
>>>> more months.
>>>> If we had completed it, we would have restored a Swing application,
>>> mostly
>>>> replaced by Kibana stacks.
>>>> 
>>>> At this point, I don't see how we can write the tons of code necessary,
>>> and
>>>> also not how useful it would be. Either all our users are using Log4j 1,
>>> or
>>>> we don't have any users at all for Chainsaw, since it didn't work.
>>>> 
>>>> For that reason, I would like to propose to move Chainsaw to dormant. If
>>> we
>>>> feel for it, we can work and fix it - we should not archive the repo.
>>> But I
>>>> would like to make clear that Chainsaw is not in good shape, and people
>>>> should only use it only "at their own risk."
>>>> 
>>>> I would like to make clear that this proposal is not something I say
>>> easily,
>>>> but I feel it is in the best interest of our users to communicate how we
>>>> currently see the status of this project.
>>>> 
>>>> Please note, that I don't have much time to continue to work on it in the
>>>> next months.
>>>> 
>>>> Remembering the last discussion about this: Scott, are you OK with that
>>>> move? I know it's your baby, but as long as we don't have a working
>>> product,
>>>> we should move it. I am open to moving it back when we somehow get rid of
>>>> all the problems.
>>>> 
>>>> Please let me know if one of you has an alternate proposal - we can also
>>>> discuss it in the next call.
>>>> 
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Christian
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> The Apache Software Foundation
>>>> V.P., Data Privacy
>>>> 
>>> 

Re: [chainsaw] Status change?

[Robert Middleton <rm...@apache.org>]

+1

While I agree that it can be useful, it was never really in a state
where it is.  I think it has a lot of good ideas, but to make it more
modern and practical it needs to have a much better workflow.

I may mess around with it more at some point, but it would take a lot
to be practical.

If there is a concerted effort in the future to improve it by people
who do find it useful, I would definitely be open to looking at it
again.

-Robert Middleton

On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 2:56 AM Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Allow me to make some corrections:
>
> `XmlLayout` is dropped in Log4j 3, not in Log4j 2.
>
> Logstash (the L in the ELK, Elasticsearch-Logstash-Kibana, stack) supports
> reading logs from a file formatted using a particular pattern. You combine
> Filebeat with grok filter
> <https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/logstash/current/advanced-pipeline.html>
> to achieve that.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 5:19 AM Scott Deboy <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for spending time working on it Christian.
> >
> > I started contributing to Chainsaw in 2003. I agree. It's time.
> >
> > The primary benefit of Chainsaw was its built-in support for real-time
> > tailing of ssh-accessible pattern-layout based logs  - something
> > Kibana doesn't support well, and something no-one ever really
> > understood about it.
> >
> > It was always a dev-focused tool - it works great for local dev, and
> > works in some prod envs, if you spend enough time to get the setup to
> > work.
> >
> > There was no great reason to move off of the log41 deps really - they
> > aren't used for anything other than parsing the patternlayout, but
> > log4j1 is dead, so I get it.
> >
> > I use it for my work, and will continue to do so, but the
> > chainsaw-with-log4j1-dep branch. I may revert master back to that,
> > because why not.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Thanks again for putting up with my persistence to try and make it
> > useful to folks - I appreciate it  :)
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > On 2/6/24, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > we have had Chainsaw for a long time in our product list, and I can
> > totally
> > > see that some - myself included - are emotionally attached to it.
> > However,
> > > due to my work on it, I have given it some additional thought.
> > >
> > > After working with the Chainsaw code base for a while, I saw that many
> > > features were commented out and removed when migrating to Log4j 2.
> > >
> > > Some basic features, such as "Open Logfile to view it directly." were
> > > removed. It is already hard to recover the functionality since
> > log4j-extras
> > > no longer exists. In addition, as I learned recently, Log4j 2 has removed
> > > the XML Formatter. The old implementation of Chainsaw could only open
> > > XML-formatted log files.
> > >
> > > Honestly, there is much work to make Chainsaw a working product again. I
> > > mostly did refactorings and clean-ups, but I am not even through. I could
> > > continue like this for two more months.
> > >
> > > Restoring the old functionality and making it functional again requires
> > even
> > > more months.
> > > If we had completed it, we would have restored a Swing application,
> > mostly
> > > replaced by Kibana stacks.
> > >
> > > At this point, I don't see how we can write the tons of code necessary,
> > and
> > > also not how useful it would be. Either all our users are using Log4j 1,
> > or
> > > we don't have any users at all for Chainsaw, since it didn't work.
> > >
> > > For that reason, I would like to propose to move Chainsaw to dormant. If
> > we
> > > feel for it, we can work and fix it - we should not archive the repo.
> > But I
> > > would like to make clear that Chainsaw is not in good shape, and people
> > > should only use it only "at their own risk."
> > >
> > > I would like to make clear that this proposal is not something I say
> > easily,
> > > but I feel it is in the best interest of our users to communicate how we
> > > currently see the status of this project.
> > >
> > > Please note, that I don't have much time to continue to work on it in the
> > > next months.
> > >
> > > Remembering the last discussion about this: Scott, are you OK with that
> > > move? I know it's your baby, but as long as we don't have a working
> > product,
> > > we should move it. I am open to moving it back when we somehow get rid of
> > > all the problems.
> > >
> > > Please let me know if one of you has an alternate proposal - we can also
> > > discuss it in the next call.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Christian
> > >
> > > --
> > > The Apache Software Foundation
> > > V.P., Data Privacy
> > >
> >

Re: [chainsaw] Status change?

[Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci>]

+1

Allow me to make some corrections:

`XmlLayout` is dropped in Log4j 3, not in Log4j 2.

Logstash (the L in the ELK, Elasticsearch-Logstash-Kibana, stack) supports
reading logs from a file formatted using a particular pattern. You combine
Filebeat with grok filter
<https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/logstash/current/advanced-pipeline.html>
to achieve that.


On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 5:19 AM Scott Deboy <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you for spending time working on it Christian.
>
> I started contributing to Chainsaw in 2003. I agree. It's time.
>
> The primary benefit of Chainsaw was its built-in support for real-time
> tailing of ssh-accessible pattern-layout based logs  - something
> Kibana doesn't support well, and something no-one ever really
> understood about it.
>
> It was always a dev-focused tool - it works great for local dev, and
> works in some prod envs, if you spend enough time to get the setup to
> work.
>
> There was no great reason to move off of the log41 deps really - they
> aren't used for anything other than parsing the patternlayout, but
> log4j1 is dead, so I get it.
>
> I use it for my work, and will continue to do so, but the
> chainsaw-with-log4j1-dep branch. I may revert master back to that,
> because why not.
>
> +1
>
> Thanks again for putting up with my persistence to try and make it
> useful to folks - I appreciate it  :)
>
> Scott
>
>
> On 2/6/24, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > we have had Chainsaw for a long time in our product list, and I can
> totally
> > see that some - myself included - are emotionally attached to it.
> However,
> > due to my work on it, I have given it some additional thought.
> >
> > After working with the Chainsaw code base for a while, I saw that many
> > features were commented out and removed when migrating to Log4j 2.
> >
> > Some basic features, such as "Open Logfile to view it directly." were
> > removed. It is already hard to recover the functionality since
> log4j-extras
> > no longer exists. In addition, as I learned recently, Log4j 2 has removed
> > the XML Formatter. The old implementation of Chainsaw could only open
> > XML-formatted log files.
> >
> > Honestly, there is much work to make Chainsaw a working product again. I
> > mostly did refactorings and clean-ups, but I am not even through. I could
> > continue like this for two more months.
> >
> > Restoring the old functionality and making it functional again requires
> even
> > more months.
> > If we had completed it, we would have restored a Swing application,
> mostly
> > replaced by Kibana stacks.
> >
> > At this point, I don't see how we can write the tons of code necessary,
> and
> > also not how useful it would be. Either all our users are using Log4j 1,
> or
> > we don't have any users at all for Chainsaw, since it didn't work.
> >
> > For that reason, I would like to propose to move Chainsaw to dormant. If
> we
> > feel for it, we can work and fix it - we should not archive the repo.
> But I
> > would like to make clear that Chainsaw is not in good shape, and people
> > should only use it only "at their own risk."
> >
> > I would like to make clear that this proposal is not something I say
> easily,
> > but I feel it is in the best interest of our users to communicate how we
> > currently see the status of this project.
> >
> > Please note, that I don't have much time to continue to work on it in the
> > next months.
> >
> > Remembering the last discussion about this: Scott, are you OK with that
> > move? I know it's your baby, but as long as we don't have a working
> product,
> > we should move it. I am open to moving it back when we somehow get rid of
> > all the problems.
> >
> > Please let me know if one of you has an alternate proposal - we can also
> > discuss it in the next call.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Christian
> >
> > --
> > The Apache Software Foundation
> > V.P., Data Privacy
> >
>

Re: [chainsaw] Status change?

[Scott Deboy <sc...@gmail.com>]

Thank you for spending time working on it Christian.

I started contributing to Chainsaw in 2003. I agree. It's time.

The primary benefit of Chainsaw was its built-in support for real-time
tailing of ssh-accessible pattern-layout based logs  - something
Kibana doesn't support well, and something no-one ever really
understood about it.

It was always a dev-focused tool - it works great for local dev, and
works in some prod envs, if you spend enough time to get the setup to
work.

There was no great reason to move off of the log41 deps really - they
aren't used for anything other than parsing the patternlayout, but
log4j1 is dead, so I get it.

I use it for my work, and will continue to do so, but the
chainsaw-with-log4j1-dep branch. I may revert master back to that,
because why not.

+1

Thanks again for putting up with my persistence to try and make it
useful to folks - I appreciate it  :)

Scott


On 2/6/24, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello
>
> we have had Chainsaw for a long time in our product list, and I can totally
> see that some - myself included - are emotionally attached to it. However,
> due to my work on it, I have given it some additional thought.
>
> After working with the Chainsaw code base for a while, I saw that many
> features were commented out and removed when migrating to Log4j 2.
>
> Some basic features, such as "Open Logfile to view it directly." were
> removed. It is already hard to recover the functionality since log4j-extras
> no longer exists. In addition, as I learned recently, Log4j 2 has removed
> the XML Formatter. The old implementation of Chainsaw could only open
> XML-formatted log files.
>
> Honestly, there is much work to make Chainsaw a working product again. I
> mostly did refactorings and clean-ups, but I am not even through. I could
> continue like this for two more months.
>
> Restoring the old functionality and making it functional again requires even
> more months.
> If we had completed it, we would have restored a Swing application, mostly
> replaced by Kibana stacks.
>
> At this point, I don't see how we can write the tons of code necessary, and
> also not how useful it would be. Either all our users are using Log4j 1, or
> we don't have any users at all for Chainsaw, since it didn't work.
>
> For that reason, I would like to propose to move Chainsaw to dormant. If we
> feel for it, we can work and fix it - we should not archive the repo. But I
> would like to make clear that Chainsaw is not in good shape, and people
> should only use it only "at their own risk."
>
> I would like to make clear that this proposal is not something I say easily,
> but I feel it is in the best interest of our users to communicate how we
> currently see the status of this project.
>
> Please note, that I don't have much time to continue to work on it in the
> next months.
>
> Remembering the last discussion about this: Scott, are you OK with that
> move? I know it's your baby, but as long as we don't have a working product,
> we should move it. I am open to moving it back when we somehow get rid of
> all the problems.
>
> Please let me know if one of you has an alternate proposal - we can also
> discuss it in the next call.
>
> Kind regards,
> Christian
>
> --
> The Apache Software Foundation
> V.P., Data Privacy
>