FYI - I’ve watched Logback’s lists over the years and the RollingFileAppender is consistently the component that gets Jira issues opened on it. I think moving to use a worker thread to initiate rollovers will help, but my impression is that file system issues, especially on Windows, will always make it vulnerable to weird oddities.
Ralph > On Jul 4, 2015, at 7:42 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I agree that 1.x is ready for EOL and I too feel bad for users that take time > to work in Bugzilla. Closing Bugzilla will just make some users create Jira > tickets though. It might still be good to have an apache place where users > can collect 1.x patches and discuss 1.x issues that we can still monitor, > especially since there is much information already there. Keeping it read > only does not quite fit that bill but i get weary of typing "not actively > maintained". I guess closing might help send a clearer message. I see that > Struts starts at 2.0 in Jira. > > Do we all feel that 2.x has all the features and compatibility needs to shut > down? Seems like yes to me. Rolling file appenders need some tweaks imo and > we have tickets for that. > > I do like the struts FAQ and especially the last entry. > > I have a big proprietary app server at work on 1.x and started a branch to > port it to 2.x last year but I got stalled when it came time to porting our > custom appenders and custom initialization code. It's just too much work. If > I had to redo it I would start with using the 1.2 compatibility jar to get to > dealing with our custom bits sooner. That's what I would advise people to do. > > Gary > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@apache.org> > Date: 07/04/2015 02:30 (GMT-08:00) > To: Log4J Developers List <log4j-dev@logging.apache.org> > Subject: [DISCUSS] EOL for Log4j 1.x > > Hi all, > > we are actively working on Log4j 2.x, but Log4j 1.x hasn't been touched > since the last release. I was doing the last one, and I can't see I will > find the time or motivation in any time to roll out another one. Nobody > else stood up since then. That's OK, because I can observe the community > adapting Log4j 2. No numbers, just feelings. > > I would like to propose to mark an EOL date for Log4j 1.x by the end of > the year. As we don't fix things (most likely) with 1.x, this is not > about "maintenance" at all. The future date might be more or less our > signal that we want to actively help our users migrating to 2.x. > > We can use the remaining time to write or improve documentation, maybe > even write some migration tool. > > In the announcement we should highlight the history of Log4j 1, it's > problems and why we think Log4j 2.x is the best way to log in Java > today. > > Let me know what you think about this idea. All feedback - committer or > not - is welcome. > > I suggest we leave this discussion open until we reached an agreement or > at least one week, so everybody got a chance to look into this. > > Regards, > > Christian > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
