Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

2016-11-05 19:38 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig : > On 2016-11-05, Joe wrote: > > >> If you are willing to help, please join log4net's dev mailing list and > raise your hand. Look through log4net's issue tracker and pick things you'd > like to work on. If you don't know where to

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

On 2016-11-05, Joe wrote: >> If you are willing to help, please join log4net's dev mailing list and raise >> your hand. Look through log4net's issue tracker and pick things you'd like >> to work on. If you don't know where to start, please ask, Dominik and Stefan >> will be there to help. >>

RE: Apache log4net Needs Help

> If you are willing to help, please join log4net's dev mailing list and raise > your hand. Look through log4net's issue tracker and pick things you'd like to > work on. If you don't know where to start, please ask, Dominik and Stefan > will be there to help. > If there is anything holding you

Re: AsyncAppender (was Re: Apache log4net Needs Help)

Hi Nicholas On 2016-11-01, Nicholas Duane wrote: > Got some questions around this. I was hoping that if I put the call > to LogManager.Shutdown() in my application it might call Close() on > all the appenders. However, that doesn't seem to be the case. That's what I would have expected as

Re: AsyncAppender (was Re: Apache log4net Needs Help)

app domain shutdown event. At that point you're not given any time to cleanup. Thanks, Nick From: Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2016 7:32 AM To: Log4NET User Subject: AsyncAppender (was Re: Apache log4net Needs Help) On 2

AsyncAppender (was Re: Apache log4net Needs Help)

On 2016-10-16, Nicholas Duane wrote: > By the way, what's the state of async appenders in log4net? This is one of the things I'd love people to get involved in. We've got * a simple implementation inside the sample * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET-190 *

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

the appenders in the shutdown routine as opposed to relying on .NET's appdomain shutdown logic. Thanks, Nick From: Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 4:28 PM To: Log4NET User Subject: Re: Apache log4net Needs Help >Whether a lo

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

On 2016-10-04, Nicholas Duane wrote: >> Whether a log4j2 port happens or not really is decided by the people who >> are willing and able to invest the time needed. The same is true for any >> other decision we take. There is no "business plan" for log4net, those >> who do the work decide about

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

ted to both linux/java and windows/.net. Anything else doesn't make sense, at least to me. Thanks, Nick From: Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 10:06 AM To: Log4NET User Subject: Re: Apache log4net Needs Help On 2016-10-04, Ni

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

On 2016-10-04, Nicholas Duane wrote: > While I realize resources are needed to make any changes to the code base, > even if resources are/become available it's yet another (big?) decision on > whether the changes that are made to log4net are ones which will take it off > into its own direction

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

is created which is a port of lo4j2. Thanks, Nick From: Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 12:18 AM To: log4net-user@logging.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache log4net Needs Help On 2016-10-03, Nicholas Duane wrote: > Jus

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

On 2016-10-03, Nicholas Duane wrote: > Just curious if anyone has any feedback? I think I've written this before, but in case I haven't: Whether a port of log4j 2.x will happen depends on whether people show up who want to do the porting work. This hasn't happened, yet. Cheers Stefan

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

t-user@logging.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache log4net Needs Help One thing to note is that the development of a stable logging framework is rather slow. I would not want the most stable (in regards of features and API) part of a software to need regular updates. This is one of the main reasons why we

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

for the enterprise for logging on Windows/.NET. Thanks, Nick *From:* Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:03 AM *To:* log4net-user@logging.apache.org *Subject:* Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

From: Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:03 AM To: log4net-user@logging.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache log4net Needs Help Maybe a bit of history would help. We had written our own logging framework a while back, prior to the launch of

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

mail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 2:26 AM To: log4net-user@logging.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache log4net Needs Help That's an interesting point. Would you mind to share your thoughts and reasons why you picked log4net over other logging frameworks beyond being a log4j port? On 2016-09-20 0

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

nc.com> *Sent:* Monday, September 19, 2016 3:49 PM *To:* Log4NET User *Subject:* RE: Apache log4net Needs Help >Any chance that we'll get a log4net version which is a "port" of the latest log4j2? Maybe this is a discussion for the dev list, and granted I haven’t looked at w

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

_ From: Walden H. Leverich <wald...@techsoftinc.com> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:49 PM To: Log4NET User Subject: RE: Apache log4net Needs Help > Any chance that we'll get a log4net version which is a "port" of the latest > log4j2? Maybe this is a discussion for the

RE: Apache log4net Needs Help

everich III (516) 627-3800 x3051 wald...@techsoftinc.com<mailto:wald...@techsoftinc.com> From: Nicholas Duane [mailto:nic...@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 9:19 AM To: Log4NET User <log4net-user@logging.apache.org> Subject: Re: Apache log4net Needs Help I had asked about

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

On 2016-09-14, Nicholas Duane wrote: > I had asked about this in the past and I figured I would ask again > after seeing this mail. Any chance that we'll get a log4net version > which is a "port" of the latest log4j2? If and only if we get enough people to do it, sure. Anything is possible if

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

esday, September 14, 2016 12:32 AM To: Log4NET User Subject: Re: Apache log4net Needs Help Welcome! even though the official build system currently is NAnt, development with your setup is supposed to work (if it doesn't, it is a bug). The first thing you should do is to join the log4net-dev mailin

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

do let me know. > Thanks, > Shivinder Singh >> 1-409-330-3608 > shivindersi...@hotmail.com >> From: bode...@apache.org >> To: log4net-...@logging.apache.org >> Subject: Apache log4net Needs Help >> CC: log4net-user@logging.apache.org; gene...@logging.apache.or

RE: Apache log4net Needs Help

Hello, I use log4net too, but in Windows/IIS/Visual Studio environment. If there is anything I can do let me know. Thanks, Shivinder Singh +1-409-330-3608 shivindersi...@hotmail.com > From: bode...@apache.org > To: log4net-...@logging.apache.org > Subject: Apache log4net Needs

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

On 2016-09-08, Dominik Psenner wrote: > That process is a little bit clumsy and therefore we should all agree > on one build solution. +1 We've already reached the point in trunk where a single build system doesn't work anymore. Right now it is NAnt + .NET Core's CLI. We should collect our

Re: Apache log4net Needs Help

On 2016-09-08 06:05, Stefan Bodewig wrote: Hi Justin On 2016-09-08, Justin Taylor wrote: I pulled down the source. It builds fine but the unit tests fail (log4net.vs2012.sln). Is there some setup/prerequisites I've overlooked? Currently the official build system is the Nant build. I

RE: Apache log4net Needs Help

I pulled down the source. It builds fine but the unit tests fail (log4net.vs2012.sln). Is there some setup/prerequisites I've overlooked? It's showing: Passed 121 Failed 4Errors 31 Running

Apache log4net Needs Help

This is a general call-to-arms for everyone who uses log4net as their logging solution. If log4net is the logging framework that you are using and would like to keep using in the future it is time now to get involved. The project needs a larger developing community to move on! We really need more