Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: There are a number of people looking for resolution on the code signing cert question (Eclipse plugins, maven artifacts, etc). I'll file a Jira issue. Our case is relatively straightforward - hopefully infra can automate it so we can send them binaries/drop binaries into a folder, along with a link to the vote and pgp signing info and they can sign the artifacts. We shall see. Sounds excellent. Yesterday I asked at the IRC channel, but no response. Can you proceed with the downloadable release while the Webstart release is postboned? Christian Scott On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: OK understood. Not sure were do ask, but maybe infra has an idea if such a thing exists. If not, we might ask the board if we can buy something like that On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: We need a code signing certificate that is trusted by a root cert auth, and use that cert to sign the jars - I would prefer the ASF handle this. See http://download.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/javaws/developersguide/faq.html Scott On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: http://logging.apache.org/chainsaw/download.html - by clicking on the 'Java Web Start' link, Chainsaw will download, install and run.. To update the version of Chainsaw we provide via Web Start, we need to sign the jars, since Chainsaw writes to the local file system, can initiate socket connections, etc, and Web Start only allows that if the jars are signed and the person oks the access..It seems Apache should have a cert for signing jars, instead of having to do this ourselves.. Is any pgp key fine to sign or should it be one with a trusted identiy, like this software was developed by the ASF and so on? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
Since we never had offiical release of receivers or component, is it ok to nuke them from subversion now? Christian, do you mind doing site-related stuff? I'll update wording on the Chainsaw page and update the screenshots...and I think we could be ready soon to vote on a release.. Not sure what to do about web start...thoughts? Scott On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Christian, Extras are useful and should be kept around as is, unless we choose to pull them back in to core... I agree, replacing companions with just extras seems to be a good choice. Scott On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: OK, I pulled receivers and component companion sources into Chainsaw in svn 1178304. Is deleting the entire component and receivers companions hierarchy from svn sufficient or do I need to do something else? we need to update the website, i can help here if you like There is also the question of 'companions' only being one now (extras) - not sure what to do site-wise about that. Maybe completely remove companions and just replace with 'extras'? Or keep companions and only have extras in it? Who is actually using extras? probably its time to go to attic too as there is no development interest (have not a clue here). Anyway I would remove the companions completely and replace it with extras, as you suggested. Cheers Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I would need to make a new release of Chainsaw after the log4j release at some point, assuming I needed other things from the updated version of log4j, but right now Chainsaw depends on 1.2.16 and bundles it in the standalone and DMG builds...so I think I'm ok.. (?) Yes, of course you are. I was thinking in the wrong direction. Seems as I practice the style of the drunken programmer today. Cheers Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work.
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Since we never had offiical release of receivers or component, is it ok to nuke them from subversion now? Probably we should make a new mail thread with [ANN] in the subject to make sure everybody reads, give 72h and then svn delete Christian, do you mind doing site-related stuff? Yes, can do it somewhen this week I'll update wording on the Chainsaw page and update the screenshots...and I think we could be ready soon to vote on a release.. Cool!! Not sure what to do about web start...thoughts? Can you explain, I am not aware on what exactly the question is - sorry Cheers Christian Scott On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Christian, Extras are useful and should be kept around as is, unless we choose to pull them back in to core... I agree, replacing companions with just extras seems to be a good choice. Scott On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: OK, I pulled receivers and component companion sources into Chainsaw in svn 1178304. Is deleting the entire component and receivers companions hierarchy from svn sufficient or do I need to do something else? we need to update the website, i can help here if you like There is also the question of 'companions' only being one now (extras) - not sure what to do site-wise about that. Maybe completely remove companions and just replace with 'extras'? Or keep companions and only have extras in it? Who is actually using extras? probably its time to go to attic too as there is no development interest (have not a clue here). Anyway I would remove the companions completely and replace it with extras, as you suggested. Cheers Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I would need to make a new release of Chainsaw after the log4j release at some point, assuming I needed other things from the updated version of log4j, but right now Chainsaw depends on 1.2.16 and bundles it in the standalone and DMG builds...so I think I'm ok.. (?) Yes, of course you are. I was thinking in the wrong direction. Seems as I practice the style of the drunken programmer today. Cheers Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
OK, I'll send out an announcement email and delete after 72 hours if there are no objections. Thanks for the help on the web site. Regarding Web Start, the old old old version of Chainsaw is currently available via Web Start, signed by Paul Smith a long time ago..available from the 'download link: http://logging.apache.org/chainsaw/download.html - by clicking on the 'Java Web Start' link, Chainsaw will download, install and run.. To update the version of Chainsaw we provide via Web Start, we need to sign the jars, since Chainsaw writes to the local file system, can initiate socket connections, etc, and Web Start only allows that if the jars are signed and the person oks the access..It seems Apache should have a cert for signing jars, instead of having to do this ourselves.. This was brought up a long time ago but I don't believe we ever resolved the issue. Scott On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Since we never had offiical release of receivers or component, is it ok to nuke them from subversion now? Probably we should make a new mail thread with [ANN] in the subject to make sure everybody reads, give 72h and then svn delete Christian, do you mind doing site-related stuff? Yes, can do it somewhen this week I'll update wording on the Chainsaw page and update the screenshots...and I think we could be ready soon to vote on a release.. Cool!! Not sure what to do about web start...thoughts? Can you explain, I am not aware on what exactly the question is - sorry Cheers Christian Scott On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Christian, Extras are useful and should be kept around as is, unless we choose to pull them back in to core... I agree, replacing companions with just extras seems to be a good choice. Scott On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: OK, I pulled receivers and component companion sources into Chainsaw in svn 1178304. Is deleting the entire component and receivers companions hierarchy from svn sufficient or do I need to do something else? we need to update the website, i can help here if you like There is also the question of 'companions' only being one now (extras) - not sure what to do site-wise about that. Maybe completely remove companions and just replace with 'extras'? Or keep companions and only have extras in it? Who is actually using extras? probably its time to go to attic too as there is no development interest (have not a clue here). Anyway I would remove the companions completely and replace it with extras, as you suggested. Cheers Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I would need to make a new release of Chainsaw after the log4j release at some point, assuming I needed other things from the updated version of log4j, but right now Chainsaw depends on 1.2.16 and bundles it in the standalone and DMG builds...so I think I'm ok.. (?) Yes, of course you are. I was thinking in the wrong direction. Seems as I practice the style of the drunken programmer today. Cheers Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
http://logging.apache.org/chainsaw/download.html - by clicking on the 'Java Web Start' link, Chainsaw will download, install and run.. To update the version of Chainsaw we provide via Web Start, we need to sign the jars, since Chainsaw writes to the local file system, can initiate socket connections, etc, and Web Start only allows that if the jars are signed and the person oks the access..It seems Apache should have a cert for signing jars, instead of having to do this ourselves.. Is any pgp key fine to sign or should it be one with a trusted identiy, like this software was developed by the ASF and so on? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
We need a code signing certificate that is trusted by a root cert auth, and use that cert to sign the jars - I would prefer the ASF handle this. See http://download.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/javaws/developersguide/faq.html Scott On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: http://logging.apache.org/chainsaw/download.html - by clicking on the 'Java Web Start' link, Chainsaw will download, install and run.. To update the version of Chainsaw we provide via Web Start, we need to sign the jars, since Chainsaw writes to the local file system, can initiate socket connections, etc, and Web Start only allows that if the jars are signed and the person oks the access..It seems Apache should have a cert for signing jars, instead of having to do this ourselves.. Is any pgp key fine to sign or should it be one with a trusted identiy, like this software was developed by the ASF and so on? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
OK understood. Not sure were do ask, but maybe infra has an idea if such a thing exists. If not, we might ask the board if we can buy something like that On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: We need a code signing certificate that is trusted by a root cert auth, and use that cert to sign the jars - I would prefer the ASF handle this. See http://download.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/javaws/developersguide/faq.html Scott On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: http://logging.apache.org/chainsaw/download.html - by clicking on the 'Java Web Start' link, Chainsaw will download, install and run.. To update the version of Chainsaw we provide via Web Start, we need to sign the jars, since Chainsaw writes to the local file system, can initiate socket connections, etc, and Web Start only allows that if the jars are signed and the person oks the access..It seems Apache should have a cert for signing jars, instead of having to do this ourselves.. Is any pgp key fine to sign or should it be one with a trusted identiy, like this software was developed by the ASF and so on? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
There are a number of people looking for resolution on the code signing cert question (Eclipse plugins, maven artifacts, etc). I'll file a Jira issue. Our case is relatively straightforward - hopefully infra can automate it so we can send them binaries/drop binaries into a folder, along with a link to the vote and pgp signing info and they can sign the artifacts. We shall see. Scott On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: OK understood. Not sure were do ask, but maybe infra has an idea if such a thing exists. If not, we might ask the board if we can buy something like that On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: We need a code signing certificate that is trusted by a root cert auth, and use that cert to sign the jars - I would prefer the ASF handle this. See http://download.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/javaws/developersguide/faq.html Scott On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: http://logging.apache.org/chainsaw/download.html - by clicking on the 'Java Web Start' link, Chainsaw will download, install and run.. To update the version of Chainsaw we provide via Web Start, we need to sign the jars, since Chainsaw writes to the local file system, can initiate socket connections, etc, and Web Start only allows that if the jars are signed and the person oks the access..It seems Apache should have a cert for signing jars, instead of having to do this ourselves.. Is any pgp key fine to sign or should it be one with a trusted identiy, like this software was developed by the ASF and so on? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
OK, I pulled receivers and component companion sources into Chainsaw in svn 1178304. Is deleting the entire component and receivers companions hierarchy from svn sufficient or do I need to do something else? There is also the question of 'companions' only being one now (extras) - not sure what to do site-wise about that. Maybe completely remove companions and just replace with 'extras'? Or keep companions and only have extras in it? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I would need to make a new release of Chainsaw after the log4j release at some point, assuming I needed other things from the updated version of log4j, but right now Chainsaw depends on 1.2.16 and bundles it in the standalone and DMG builds...so I think I'm ok.. (?) Yes, of course you are. I was thinking in the wrong direction. Seems as I practice the style of the drunken programmer today. Cheers Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: OK, I pulled receivers and component companion sources into Chainsaw in svn 1178304. Is deleting the entire component and receivers companions hierarchy from svn sufficient or do I need to do something else? we need to update the website, i can help here if you like There is also the question of 'companions' only being one now (extras) - not sure what to do site-wise about that. Maybe completely remove companions and just replace with 'extras'? Or keep companions and only have extras in it? Who is actually using extras? probably its time to go to attic too as there is no development interest (have not a clue here). Anyway I would remove the companions completely and replace it with extras, as you suggested. Cheers Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I would need to make a new release of Chainsaw after the log4j release at some point, assuming I needed other things from the updated version of log4j, but right now Chainsaw depends on 1.2.16 and bundles it in the standalone and DMG builds...so I think I'm ok.. (?) Yes, of course you are. I was thinking in the wrong direction. Seems as I practice the style of the drunken programmer today. Cheers Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org --
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
Thanks Christian, Extras are useful and should be kept around as is, unless we choose to pull them back in to core... I agree, replacing companions with just extras seems to be a good choice. Scott On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: OK, I pulled receivers and component companion sources into Chainsaw in svn 1178304. Is deleting the entire component and receivers companions hierarchy from svn sufficient or do I need to do something else? we need to update the website, i can help here if you like There is also the question of 'companions' only being one now (extras) - not sure what to do site-wise about that. Maybe completely remove companions and just replace with 'extras'? Or keep companions and only have extras in it? Who is actually using extras? probably its time to go to attic too as there is no development interest (have not a clue here). Anyway I would remove the companions completely and replace it with extras, as you suggested. Cheers Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I would need to make a new release of Chainsaw after the log4j release at some point, assuming I needed other things from the updated version of log4j, but right now Chainsaw depends on 1.2.16 and bundles it in the standalone and DMG builds...so I think I'm ok.. (?) Yes, of course you are. I was thinking in the wrong direction. Seems as I practice the style of the drunken programmer today. Cheers Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
ok, moving ahead with removal then On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
I would need to make a new release of Chainsaw after the log4j release at some point, assuming I needed other things from the updated version of log4j, but right now Chainsaw depends on 1.2.16 and bundles it in the standalone and DMG builds...so I think I'm ok.. (?) Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I would need to make a new release of Chainsaw after the log4j release at some point, assuming I needed other things from the updated version of log4j, but right now Chainsaw depends on 1.2.16 and bundles it in the standalone and DMG builds...so I think I'm ok.. (?) Yes, of course you are. I was thinking in the wrong direction. Seems as I practice the style of the drunken programmer today. Cheers Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I'm leaning toward keeping them in the same package location - when log4j is released, I can remove the classes from Chainsaw and everything will still work. But you need to make a new release of chainsaw together with the new release of log4j, right? Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I need to use some of the classes that were copied to core from receivers in 1165491 (rewriteappender, utillogginglevel)... Will there be a log4j release soon or should I duplicate these classes in Chainsaw? I don't want a log4j release to hold up a Chainsaw release. I doubt there will be a new log4j release in near future. Therefore I am +1 on making Chainsaw independent. To my knowledge it is only 3 classes or so, I would go with duplicating them. But I think I would change the package to prevent a conflict with a later log4j which might have the same classes Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: Definitely! Anything to simplify things and get this out the door! Thanks for all your help Christian, Scott On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, moving ahead with removal then Thanks, and have fun - removing old stuff makes me always feel good, hope it is the same feeling for you :-) On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'll nuke component and receivers and pull the useful bits in to chainsaw...does that mean we should remove the parent maven project then? If you speak of the parent for Companions: yes. I think we can remove the whole Companions tree to the attic then Christian Scott On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org wrote: Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
Forget the packaging renaming bit. No need to make Chainsaw an OSGi package and no need to add additional work. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
At this point I'm only focusing only on 2.0. I've been wondering if I should create a subproject for chainsaw or if it should remain separate. I already moved a large part of extras in as a core part of the functionality. Ralph On Sep 1, 2011, at 4:13 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Scott, Curt had an interesting idea lately, he mentioned it might make sense to move the companions code into chainsaw. What do you think on that? I like the idea - less releases, and no other interested parties in having companions. Please comment, when you can :-) Cheers 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
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Scott Deboy scott.de...@gmail.com wrote: I think pulling in component would make sense...no one else probably uses it. Receivers? I suppose if they were built as a separate jar that'd be fine too, I have no idea who uses them if anyone. We can always cut them out again if somebody wants it - which is very unlikely. If you are fine with moving them to chainsaw... do you need any help? Scott On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: At this point I'm only focusing only on 2.0. I've been wondering if I should create a subproject for chainsaw or if it should remain separate. I already moved a large part of extras in as a core part of the functionality. Ralph On Sep 1, 2011, at 4:13 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Scott, Curt had an interesting idea lately, he mentioned it might make sense to move the companions code into chainsaw. What do you think on that? I like the idea - less releases, and no other interested parties in having companions. Please comment, when you can :-) Cheers 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 -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: At this point I'm only focusing only on 2.0. I've been wondering if I should create a subproject for chainsaw or if it should remain separate. I already moved a large part of extras in as a core part of the functionality. B/c of Chainsaw2 builds upon log4j2, I think I would create a subproject. This would make it easier to release Chainsaw version for a specific log4j2 release Ralph On Sep 1, 2011, at 4:13 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Scott, Curt had an interesting idea lately, he mentioned it might make sense to move the companions code into chainsaw. What do you think on that? I like the idea - less releases, and no other interested parties in having companions. Please comment, when you can :-) Cheers 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 -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
Re: Companions - Chainsaw?
On Sep 1, 2011, at 6:13 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Scott, Curt had an interesting idea lately, he mentioned it might make sense to move the companions code into chainsaw. What do you think on that? I like the idea - less releases, and no other interested parties in having companions. Please comment, when you can :-) Cheers Christian Did a quick review of receivers and there are a few things in there that are general purpose that would be better to move into log4j while most everything else would move directly into Chainsaw. Specifically, the org.apache.log4j.rewrite package and org.apache.log4j.helpers.UtilLoggingLevel look like they might have a better to have in log4j. http://logging.apache.org/log4j/companions/receivers/apidocs/org/apache/log4j/rewrite/package-summary.html http://logging.apache.org/log4j/companions/receivers/apidocs/org/apache/log4j/helpers/UtilLoggingLevel.html I think OSGi does not like to have a package to span multiple jars, so it might make sense to tweak the package names so that Chainsaw.jar does not define any classes in packages that are already defined in log4j.jar. That likely would have also been an issue if we proceeded to do a companion release. All the package names came from the backport of the log4j 1.3 code and there was no thought of the OSGi in the package naming. I think that I'd be able to do some quick surgery to svn mv the code from component and receivers into the proper places and fix up the import statements over the weekend. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
