We have tested and that appears to work. +1 to the 1.2.15 release.
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 11:35 PM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This has been backported to trunk with svn revision 1714267. The 1.2.14 tag
> is on svn revision 1713733 which means that it hasn't made it into 1.2.14 but
> is included if you build log4net from source. I've tagged 1.2.15RC1 and it
> would be great if you could test with that tag. This is the svn url to the
> tag:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/log4net/tags/1.2.15RC1
> <http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/log4net/tags/1.2.15RC1>
>
> Cheers
>
> On 2015-12-03 02:23, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
>> Okay, our testing showed a bad result. 1.2.14 doesn’t fix the async/await
>> context issues.
>>
>> It looks like LOG4NET-462 didn’t get merged into 1.2.14. Our special build
>> of log4net includes that fix, and we don’t have async/await context issues.
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/log4net/commit/f26857ebf848f067fde375e3bb32a736cf77ed9a
>>
>> <https://github.com/apache/log4net/commit/f26857ebf848f067fde375e3bb32a736cf77ed9a>
>>
>> I don’t see that in the 1.2.x branch. Am I not seeing this correctly?
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 29, 2015, at 2:24 PM, Jeremiah Gowdy <jerem...@gowdy.me
>>> <mailto:jerem...@gowdy.me>> wrote:
>>>
>>> It's going out with our next release to QA, next week.
>>>
>>> On Nov 29, 2015, at 7:40 AM, Dominik Psenner <
>>> <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>dpsen...@gmail.com <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jeremiah, whats the state of your deployment? Have you made a notice of
>>>> all the bugs I had introduced and that they are fixed in trunk?
>>>>
>>>> On 29 Nov 2015 4:38 p.m., "Dominik Psenner" <dpsen...@gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 29 Nov 2015 10:54 a.m., "Jeremiah Gowdy" <jerem...@gowdy.me
>>>> <mailto:jerem...@gowdy.me>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Agreed. We have to start drawing the drawing the line. .NET is so
>>>> > backwards compatible, I think it's pretty left behind to leave .NET 2.0
>>>> > and beyond behind. As a carrier grade application we are far beyond
>>>> > needing 2.0 support.
>>>>
>>>> Beware, there are devices out there that support only .net 3.5. i am glad
>>>> we could come to a sound agreement.
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Nov 28, 2015, at 11:01 PM, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org
>>>> > > <mailto:bode...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> On 2015-11-27, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> In my opinion, all releases after 1.2.15 should be built against:
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> * mono 3.5
>>>> > >> * mono 4.0
>>>> > >> * .net 3.5
>>>> > >> * .net 4.0
>>>> > >> * .net 4.5
>>>> > >> * .net cp 3.5
>>>> > >> * .net cp 4.0
>>>> > >
>>>> > > [...]
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> So what if we announce EOL for all the other builds? We can still try
>>>> > >> to be
>>>> > >> backwards compatible to ancient framework versions, but whoever needs
>>>> > >> a
>>>> > >> binary for it should build it from source.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > That's fine with me, but I should be the last one to call the shots.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Stefan
>>
>
