logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Avalon Logging Toolkit
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2002 11:13:28 GMT
Hi,

It seems like Ceki is back doing what he does best. For those of you who are 
not aware heres a little history of things. Back then there was just LogKit 
at apache. At some point I believe Apache (or maybe just Stephano and Fede?) 
were approached by Ceki because he wanted to bring Log4j to Apache so as to 
get more exposure.

The plan was that LogKit would be merged into Log4j and that way Avalon + 
Cocoon would be based on Log4j. However at that point Log4j seriously lacked 
features that were necessary in this context.

So Ceki asked me to go through the codebase and suggest things. SO I did this 
- at least on on two different occasions, each time took a few hours or so. I 
ended up generating a list of features that LogKit had that we needed to be 
in Log4j before we could adopt it.

Most of the features Ceki implemented but some he didn't want which made it 
impossible for Avalon to adopt it. Seing that he wouldn't budge I suggested 
to him 3 different ways in which LogKit and Log4j could share code. He didn't 
even bother to respond to these mails. Though he does claim that he never 
received one of them and that his mail server munched the mail.

Anyways things went on. At one stage someone asked me what advantage LogKit 
had over Log4j. I answered simplicity/ease of use, ease of integration into 
servers and performance. Next thing I know Cekis pops onto mailing list and 
calls me a liar and a thief. He seemed to be put out that i said LogKit was 
more performance sensitive ;) Eventually I believe he conceded that it was 
the case but then he went onto to claim that performance is not important 
"read my article on it". Ho hum.

You may find it wierd that he called me a thief given that many of the 
features adopted by Log4j were originally in LogKit and the time of 
implementation roughly coresponded to when I told him to fix these things. 
Even more amusing is that LogKit did another release. The day after the 
release Log4j cloned a feature from LogKit that it lacked ... luckily Ceki 
could find a mail in one of the archives where a user had requested a similar 
feature so he could claim that he had originally had that idea from the start 
;)

Anyways this pattern of things continued and we see him here again calling me 
a thief. This pattern of abuse towards me got so bad in recent times I had to 
ask Ceki to never email me personally. Never has he bothered to critique 
LogKit on any terms it has always been his way to deride and insult the 
people of it instead.

For those of you who like  to think for themselves. You can have a look at a 
file called HISTORY.txt (or something similar) that is/was in log4j CVS that 
catalogs when changes to Log4j occured. You can also look into the mailing 
list archives that list when I suggested these things to Ceki ... notice a 
pattern? Start looking around 0.8.3/0.8.4 I think.

Anyways Im sure the response will some how state I am a liar or similar - 
well good luck to you Ceki - I aint going to respond. You are not even worth 
flaming.

BTW Sam this is what I was talking about when I said "nasty" ;)

On Mon, 4 Feb 2002 06:54, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Ceki Glc wrote:
> > It is indeed a straight rip-off from log4j. What is most disturbing is
> > that this is happening within the boundaries of the foundation.  Some
> > people will condone such acts plagiarism in any way they can. It is
> > easier to ignore plagiarism than actually to deal with it.
>
> Plagiarism is a strong word.  I'm not even sure what it means in an open
> source context.
>
> In any case, an oversimplication of the history as I understand it: Avalon
> is based on design principles such as inversion of control.  Those
> requirements were conveyed here, and found to be impossible to implement
> without affecting backwards compatibiltity.  While this is certainly a
> valid consideration, it did not make the requirements go away.
>
> Add in a dash of personallity conflict (example: people who are prone to
> throw around terms like "plagiarism").  And add in the fact that what
> became logkit was actually a part of an apache codebase before log4j ever
> was, and you get the current state.
>
> While I'm not exactly thrilled with duplication, I certainly prefer it over
> blocking other people's work.
>
> - Sam Ruby

-- 
Cheers,

Pete

*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Common sense is the collection of prejudices        |
|  acquired by age 18. " -Albert Einstein              |
*------------------------------------------------------*


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:log4j-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:log4j-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message