I had looked through the bug tracking list, and there are most certainly some good things in there to dig into. I hope everyone on this list will forgive the newbie question on my part. However, how is work coordination done on these items? Since it appears the "assignee" field isn't used. Like I said before, I would love to dig in and help, but want to make sure duplicate work isn't being done.
Thanks again for everyone's help. Jonathan Wiggs -----Original Message----- From: Ron Grabowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 5:54 AM To: Log4NET Dev Subject: RE: http://logging.apache.org/log4net/roadmap.html According to the issue tracker: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET there are about 24 open issues. You could take a look at some of those to get an idea of what users are asking for. --- Jonathan Wiggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thank you for addressing this question Nicko. I am relatively new to > this mailing group, and have been trying to get a feel for the > progress of the project. Related to that, are there tasks that > someone new with a strong background in software engineering and .NET > could pick up to help move the project along? I am certainly > interested in becoming a contributor to the project. Your list of > items below certainly speaks to what needs to be done better than the > web site or Q&A sections do. > > Thanks! > Jonathan Wiggs > > ________________________________ > > From: Nicko Cadell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sun 6/26/2005 3:22 PM > To: Log4NET Dev > Subject: RE: http://logging.apache.org/log4net/roadmap.html > > > > The old plan file is a little out of date. These are the things that > I > think are still outstanding from the old plan: > > 1) Lots more unit tests. > > 2) Documentation needs to be enhanced with more configuration > examples > and much more hand-holding. > Documentation for each appender > Documentation for each example > log4net Features > Howto build log4net (NAnt & Visual Studio .NET) > > 3) Examples need to be available in C# and VB where possible. Some > Managed C++ examples would be nice. > > 4) Investigate a WMI appender. > > > Of these I think that 1 is always going to be around, but we could do > a > much better job even if we port over the tests from log4j. The > documentation has improved, but as in 2 we don't have documentation > for > each appender beyond what is in the SDK docs. We should have > documentation for our configuration schema that goes in element by > element. We have some VB examples and I think one managed C++ > example, > we could always do with more examples in more languages, but we also > need to document them. I don't think that 4, the WMI appender, is a > priority now, if it is easy to do then we can add it as a sample > appender. > > > The plan had some 1.3 features: > > 5) Replace internal logging (LogLog) with log4net itself. Replace > ErrorHandler and OnlyOnceErrorHandler with alarm style extension. > > 6) Strategy based rollovers. Unlike the RollingFileAppender, Apache > Avalon's logkit has a nice and clean implementation for rolling > files. > See the org.apache.log.output.io.rotate package for exact details. > Their > implementation is based on strategies which are sub-components of > appender. > > 7) Cope with appender failure. Add a FallbackErrorHandler that > implements the ErrorHandler interface such that a secondary appender > may > be specified. This secondary appender takes over if the primary > appender > fails for whatever reason. > > > Of these 7 is the most difficult to get right and probably the most > important. It may require significant changes to the log4net core to > implement. We may also need to coordinate our implementation with > other > log4x projects. > > Thoughts? > > Nicko > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ron Grabowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 16 June 2005 18:02 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: http://logging.apache.org/log4net/roadmap.html > > > > I noticed this file has been "coming soon" for several > > months. I recall seeing a road map when 1.2.0 beta 8 was on > > the website. Any word future features or things that still > > need to be done? > > > > > > >
