> > I just tried to figure out, if log4cxx is still alive. > > You could characterize log4cxx as undead. > > The mailing list tends to be low volume because (a) the documentation > is good, (b) the code is good and (c) most "How can I do XYZ?" queries > have answers identical to their Java log4j equivalent. > > I wouldn't shy away from log4cxx for the reasons you mention. I would > shy away if you're uncomfortable periodically digging in the issue > tracker to resolve build-related questions. Or if something in the > issue tracker is a must-have feature because, as you've noted, there's > not a lot of new feature development.
Well, I don't shy away from using log4cxx. Actually, we are using it extensively. But switching from Visual Studio 2008 to 2010 was really a pain. Not because of log4cxx, but because of a compiler flaw. We had to move a bunch of these LOG4CXX_LIST_DEF macros around. And 0.10.0 has been released almost 4 years ago. As far as I know, there are a lot of improvements to log4cxx in the repository, that haven't made it into a release. Torsten
