Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-15, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 08/15/2011 11:39 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> If we get back on track with regular releases the occasional trunk >> breakage will be OK as people won't be forced to use arbitrary trunk >> revisions. > No, it is not OK at all. IMHO every recorded history

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 08/15/2011 11:39 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > If we get back on track with regular releases the occasional trunk > breakage will be OK as people won't be forced to use arbitrary trunk > revisions. No, it is not OK at all. IMHO every recorded history should be a monolithic working library. Only i

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-15, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 08/15/2011 07:26 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> I think it is important for us all, that we do have a single place with >> the code to discuss - and once we have enough people with write access >> it won't be necessary to think about any other place than sv

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 08/15/2011 07:26 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > I think it is important for us all, that we do have a single place with > the code to discuss - and once we have enough people with write access > it won't be necessary to think about any other place than svn for this. > > The "hg or git clone of svn

Moving Forward

Hi all, it seems that so far we agree that the very next steps should be * release 1.2.11 ASAP. This should be current trunk plus all known good patches from JIRA that won't make it impossible to build for 1.0 or compact framework. I think it may be possible to provide client profile vers

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-15, Curt Arnold wrote: > Code development at the ASF should be done in the open and not in a > private branch that unveiled to the community (has happened in the > past) as that basically prevents anyone else from influencing the work > while in process. To be fair, this is not what Do

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-14, Dominik Psenner wrote: > sorry for the late response. This sunny sunday took me for a trip into > the mountains. :-) See the inlines below. I live further up north in Germany (guessing from your name) so it hasn't been as sunny around here 8-( >> The normal state of an ASF project

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

I currently have commit rights and I'm working the process right now to add additional help though the process takes a certain amount of time. Expect an announcement on Wednesday. Code development at the ASF should be done in the open and not in a private branch that unveiled to the community (

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

I forgot to say that this workflow works just great even for the time we have no write privileges on the SVN repository. The changesets will be stuck at "log4net-crew", waiting there to be pushed to the svn repository. Best regards -- Dominik Psenner ## OpenPGP Key Signature #

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

Hi Stefan and Roy, sorry for the late response. This sunny sunday took me for a trip into the mountains. :-) See the inlines below. > The normal state of an ASF project is that all people who contribute > code on a regular basis have write access - if they want it. I would not advise to commit t

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-13, Roy Chastain wrote: > My immediate takeaway is that by using a distributed VCS we have the > capabilities that I am more used to in that we are working "connected" > instead of "disconnected" with the connection blocker being someone who > can commit in SVN on ASF. Yes, BUT. But o

RE: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

1:18 To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org Subject: Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions On 2011-08-13, Roy Chastain wrote: >>> Who are those people? Maybe they should comment on this? > I am one of those people. At this point I have minimal (if any) > understanding of the

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-13, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > svn is pretty similar to TFS The version control part of TFS that is. There are differences but both have similar (limited) support for merge tracking, perform branching in the file-system space (i.e. copy a trunk dir to a branches/X_Y_Z dir) and both are t

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-13, Roy Chastain wrote: >>> Who are those people? Maybe they should comment on this? > I am one of those people. At this point I have minimal (if any) > understanding of the actual patch insertion process, but given I don't > have write privileges that is okay. I also have minimal/no

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-13, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 08/13/2011 06:34 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >>> For each of them we have to: >>> * see if the patches are not fixed already >>> * see if they fit into the current latest tip (trunk) >>> * revise if they include sane changes >>> * determine if they shou

RE: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

n...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2011 03:56 To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org Subject: Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions On 08/13/2011 06:30 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > We do have a read-only git version at git://git.apache.org/log4net.git > <http://git.apache

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 08/13/2011 06:34 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> For each of them we have to: >> * see if the patches are not fixed already >> * see if they fit into the current latest tip (trunk) >> * revise if they include sane changes >> * determine if they should be included in the upcoming release > > If

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 08/13/2011 06:30 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > We do have a read-only git version at git://git.apache.org/log4net.git > mirrored at github as well > Didn't know that. :-) Since that repository is read-only, it is not exactly

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-13, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 08/12/2011 10:46 PM, Dominik Psenner wrote: >> I actually just cloned the apache svn and am currently pushing the >> changes to a bitbucket repository here: >> https://bitbucket.org/NachbarsLumpi/log4net > FWIW, I managed to apply some of the patches th

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-12, Dominik Psenner wrote: > The operation could take some time. Once it is done, there should be 553 > changesets. The last would be: > changeset: 553:7f145743e63e > tag: tip > user:rgrabowski@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68 > date:Wed Oct 13 03:26:57 20

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-12, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 08/12/2011 07:19 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> Short term we'll be slowed down by the fact that there are only very few >> people with write access to the source tree, of course. > Could the short term development be done in a remote repository, > likewis

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 08/12/2011 10:46 PM, Dominik Psenner wrote: > I actually just cloned the apache svn and am currently pushing the > changes to a bitbucket repository here: > > https://bitbucket.org/NachbarsLumpi/log4net FWIW, I managed to apply some of the patches that were submitted into a fork of the just cr

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 08/12/2011 10:30 PM, Dominik Psenner wrote: > On 08/12/2011 07:19 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> Short term we'll be slowed down by the fact that there are only very few >> people with write access to the source tree, of course. > > Could the short term development be done in a remote repository

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 08/12/2011 07:19 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Short term we'll be slowed down by the fact that there are only very few > people with write access to the source tree, of course. Could the short term development be done in a remote repository, likewise hg hosted on bitbucket? One would not need to

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-12, Tasos Vogiatzoglou wrote: > I had submitted a patch about building log4net for 2010 (.NET 4 Client > profile and .NET 4) which also fixes an issue in the UdpAppender. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4NET-296 There are a few indentation changes and the rest should be str

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-12, Roy Chastain wrote: >> Have you got an environment where you can build the 1.x and compact >> framework assemblies (right now I don't)? > I could at one point a few years back, but probably not now. The same is true for my own environment. > I was referring more to just being abl

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

by the poll. > > ---------- > Roy Chastain > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bode...@apache.org] > Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 13:20 > To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org &

RE: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

port?" If not, we skip it and move to the 4.0 or 3.5 tree as dictated by the poll. -- Roy Chastain -Original Message- From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bode...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 13:20 To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org Subject: Re: Moving forward with updat

Re: Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

On 2011-08-12, Roy Chastain wrote: > I have finally gotten an environment allows me to get source etc. Great. Have you got an environemt where you can build the 1.x and compact framework assemblies (right now I don't)? SSCLI? > My questions are of the following types > 1) - Do we have a plan?

Moving forward with updates, builds and versions

I have finally gotten an environment allows me to get source etc. My questions are of the following types 1) - Do we have a plan? 2) - How do we prevent duplication of effort? 3) - Someone mentioned a poll. I would be glad to setup a survey on my SharePoint site. I hope the points below are a star