logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacob Kjome <h...@visi.com>
Subject Re: 1.3 - A Line in the Sand
Date Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:10:55 GMT
At 07:07 PM 4/2/2007, you wrote:
 >At some point we can no longer ignore the decision about where 1.3
 >should go.
 >
 >I am beginning to think that we should scale back 1.3 to be less of
 >the planned revolution and more of a substantial-update-but-
 >completely-backward compatible (to a point).
 >

I think it's been said before that 1.3 may be more of a dead end than 
anything else.  Some interesting things went into it, but the fact 
that it became so incompatible with Log4j-1.2.xx is a real 
problem.  Is it worth a release or do we just leave it as-is, forever 
alpha, and move on to 2.0?

 >We can then step back and think way beyond 1.3 and come up with a new
 >vision for what we think is important in enterprise logging.
 >
 >Firstly, what do people think of this idea?
 >

As long as we're considering things that have been ignored for a 
while, what is our official take on Logback?  It's basically a 
realization of what Log4j-1.3 was supposed to be, no?  Do we really 
have plans to best it as Log4j-2.0?  I'm not saying we don't.  I'm 
just asking the question.  And what are we going to do about 
SLF4J?  It's gained significant acceptance and we've punted on how we 
are going to approach it; implement it directly, write a wrapper for 
it (actually, this has already been done by the SLF4J team), or 
ignore it altogether.  So far, we've chosen the latter as the path of 
least resistance.

 >Secondly, what do people think  is left to do before preparing for a
 >fully supported 1.3 release ?
 >

Do we want to "fully support" 1.3 or just move on?  Log4j-1.3 is much 
larger than 1.2 because of, among other things, Joran.  Joran in 1.3 
was Ceki's brainchild and continued development of it has long since 
moved to Logback.  I'd be more comfortable letting Logback developers 
maintain the official version and use it instead of maintaining it 
ourselves.  I can't recall where I read it, but I believe it was 
stated that Joran could be used in other projects, separate from 
Logback.  Of course, then why not just use Logback?  Unless people 
are truly prepared to put in the time to figure out what the future 
of Log4j should be (and implement it), I'm afraid that Log4j-1.2.xx 
is the end of the line, though I'm completely open to being proved wrong.

 >Third, who in the dev community (not just committers) is prepared to
 >provide some effort in this regard.
 >

That's the perennial problem, isn't it?

Jake

 >cheers,
 >
 >Paul
 >


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


Mime
View raw message