logging-log4j-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com>
Subject RE: Why is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)?
Date Fri, 18 Sep 2015 19:12:49 GMT
I'll take a look at the link.  So if I'm interested in helping, if in fact the goal is to port
log4j2 to .net, then how do I know whether anyone who would make that decision is even thinking
about that, if they are thinking about it how do I know if they've decided to move forward,
and when that decision takes place?  Do I just put my name on a "waiting list"?


Subject: Re: Why is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)?
From: ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:25:40 -0700
CC: log4net-user@logging.apache.org
To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org

To answer your last question, at the ASF the project committers decide what they are going
to do. They make decisions by discussing their ideas on the mailing list.  In some ways, the
ASF is a “do-ocracy”. You can make all the recommendations you want, but ultimately it
is up to whoever implements it.
Take a look at http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html.

On Sep 18, 2015, at 7:32 AM, Nicholas Duane <nickdu@msn.com> wrote:I looked over the
thread you included below.  I can't tell from that whether the suggestion was to port log4j2.
 Not sure if the comment about starting log4net 2.0 "from scratch" is an indication of having
it be a port of log4j2.

In my mind the biggest benefit would be to have the same architecture/feature set running
on both linux and windows.  Of course it would also be great if the releases were synchronized.
 I know a big gripe of log4net is that it's not getting rev'd.

I would be interested in helping if the goal is to bring log4net in sync with log4j2.  And
by this I guess I mean port as that would seem the easiest and safest path to the goal.

I haven't worked on any open source project in the past.  I'm curious, how does this work?
 Who's coordinating and making the decisions?


From: bodewig@apache.org
To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org; log4net-user@logging.apache.org
Subject: Re: Why is log4net not more similar to log4j(2)?
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:25:00 +0200

On 2015-09-17, Gary Gregory wrote:

"Patches welcome" is my motto :-)


On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Nicholas Duane <nickdu@msn.com> wrote:

Sending to both the log4j and log4net mailing lists.

I'm curious why log4net is not more similar to log4j(2)?  Is it because
there is less development work being done on log4net and log4j had
significant changes in the 2.0 version?

I think I read somewhere that log4net was a port of log4j 1.

This is certainly part of the reason.  log4net was started as a port of
1.x a long time ago.  The developers (long before I joined) added some
deviations that look closer to what log4j 2 is doing (XML

Incidently Dominik started a discussion about log4net 2.0 on the dev
list[1] and some people expressed interest.  Any hand that can offer
some help is more than welcome, so please come over and join.

[1] thread starting with http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/logging-log4net-dev/201508.mbox/%3C03be01d0da4f%24a85aaa10%24f90ffe30%24%40apache.org%3E


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

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message