We had once the discussion that we wanted all Apache Logging projects to
become very similar in their usage, starting with the same or a very
similar configuration. Given that we should aim towards one Apache
Logging specification and several Apache Logging specification
implementations in the form of Apache Logging subprojects. That means
all the devs for all subprojects have to talk more. To me this is a good
reasons to merge the dev mailing lists. Further I don't see why the same
use case should not apply to the user mailing lists, too. Those mailing
lists see very low traffic but all of them need a larger audience. Just
quoting the last few messages of two user mailing lists I follow:
log4j-user: the last topic came in a week ago, the topic before that
about two weeks ago
log4net-user: the last topic came in 24 hours ago and the topic before
that a month ago
Cheers
On 2017-03-09 19:24, Ralph Goers wrote:
We use general as mainly an announcement list for topics that might be
of general interest to all logging projects. Generally, these are just
release announcements.
Ralph
On Mar 9, 2017, at 10:37 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com
<mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yeah, I agree that the user lists can remain separate as it doesn't
cause any issues currently. The main idea here is whether we should
merge the dev lists into one, or if we need a common dev list for all
devs to subscribe to (general@ doesn't sound appropriate, but I don't
know what that list is for).
On 9 March 2017 at 10:26, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
<mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote:
You should note that while we consider all votes only PMC votes
are “binding”. I don’t think that changes much however.
From a PMC perspective I have to say that keeping the user’s
lists separate isn’t likely to be an issue as most of the things
that would need to be discussed would be on a dev list anyway.
Ralph
On Mar 9, 2017, at 2:45 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com
<mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The votes are way too scattered over the different mailing lists
so that I didn't even find my own vote. ;-) Therefore I'm trying
to summarize the current state of the vote:
log4j-dev@, log4php-dev@, log4net-dev@, log4cxx-dev@ ->d...@logging.apache.org
<mailto:d...@logging.apache.org>
Matt Sicker: +1
Ralph Goers: +1
Stefan Bodewig: +1
Sven Rautenverg: -1
Thorsten Schöning: -0
Ivan Habunek: -0
Dominik Psenner: +1
Remko Popma: +1
Mikael Ståldal: +0
Totals so far:
+1: 5
+0: 1
-0: 2
-1: 1
log4j-user@, log4php-user@, log4net-user@, log4cxx-user@, general@
->u...@logging.apache.org <mailto:u...@logging.apache.org>
Matt Sicker: -1
Ralph Goers: +1
Stefan Bodewig: -1
Sven Rautenverg: -1
Thorsten Schöning: -0
Ivan Habunek: -0
Dominik Psenner: +1
Remko Popma: +1
Mikael Ståldal: -1
Totals so far:
+1: 3
+0: 0
-0: 2
-1: 4
Sorry to anyone who's vote is missing.
On 2017-03-08 05:20, Matt Sicker wrote:
I may be missing some mailing lists considering I just
subscribed to half of them less than five minutes ago.
This is a vote to merge the various Apache Logging Services
mailing lists. The proposal is to combine them as follows:
log4j-dev@, log4php-dev@, log4net-dev@, log4cxx-dev@ ->
d...@logging.apache.org <mailto:d...@logging.apache.org>
log4j-user@, log4php-user@, log4net-user@, log4cxx-user@,
general@ -> u...@logging.apache.org
<mailto:u...@logging.apache.org>
commits@ and private@ remain the same as before.
The proposal would also suggest that the old emails become
aliases for the combined email names so as not to lose any
future emails. To distinguish between projects, a subject tag
can be added such as:
[java]
[net]
[cxx]
[php]
Though I wouldn't think such a tag is required, though it
should help in gaining the attention of the appropriate audience.
Voting:
+1: Yes, combine the mailing lists!
+0: Go ahead, don't care that much.
-0: Don't like it, but not vetoing it.
-1: No, don't do that! I have a better idea!
This vote follows the same "lazy consensus" (at least 3 +1
binding, no -1/vetoes) we use for general releases and whatnot.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
--
Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>>
--
Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>>
