> > 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 eq
> You could characterize log4cxx as undead.
I love using Log4cxx and it's been working wonderfully in my apps over the
past couple of years. But I also submitted a patch that was never included.
Maybe the maintainers moved on to other projects and we need to find some
new ones? Anyone want to volu
Hello all,
I love log4cxx, because I love log4j and of course log4net.
There do you find a logging component which behaves nearly identically
with nearly identical config files? And so nearly every platform is
possible?
BUT, without active release cycles and a willing to integrate user
prov
Hi,
Please note I'm not a log4cxx developer.
Given that log4cxx seems to be stalled, why don't you fork it? Just set up
a repository at github, Assembla or BitBucket, become the unofficial
maintainer and start making releases. After a while, once you have shown
you are serious in your effort, you
> Given that log4cxx seems to be stalled, why don't you fork it?
The Apache infrastructure already in place for log4cxx is excellent
Forking it would be a damned shame as we'd lose that.
Plus forking is appropriate when there's a difference of vision,
design, or licensing. None apply here. Incre
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Rhys Ulerich wrote:
> > Given that log4cxx seems to be stalled, why don't you fork it?
>
> The Apache infrastructure already in place for log4cxx is excellent
> Forking it would be a damned shame as we'd lose that.
> Plus forking is appropriate when there's a diffe
