logging-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: log4cx: attic or incubation?
Date Sat, 04 May 2013 19:43:34 GMT
log4j 1.x build is also so complicated, and recently I considered
creating a Vagrant file for it.
http://vagrantup.com/

This might be cool for log4cxx too. But of course, this requires a bit
more time. I have managed to get into Puppet/Vagrant into a couple of
hours and its worth every minute, but if you will not need it, its of
course a lot of time.



On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> Well, I just downloaded the source. It seems my first challenge is going to be getting
it to compile on my Mac.  I suppose I could fire up my Linux box or install an Ubuntu VM but
I should be able to find the dependencies.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> On May 4, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
>> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>> I actually have enough of a C++ background that I could oversee incoming patches.
My problem is that I have been consumed with Log4j.  However, if it is only a few patches
I could probably find the time.  At the same time, I would not be wanting to be the one to
do the releases.
>>
>> If you could look at the patches a bit (i can take care on the typos
>> and non-c++ related things) I might find out how to do a release.
>> So far only a few patches came in.
>>
>> In this case we really might try to create a asf git mirror as Gary
>> suggested and I can start with creating a rc (somehow)
>>
>> If we get that far, it might give others a push
>>
>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On May 4, 2013, at 10:45 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>> The attic step seems like potentially unnecessary work.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the project is being used but not developed actively, that's fine.
It is
>>>>> still an asset.
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought Apache already had a process by which a project can be mirrored
>>>>> with Git?
>>>>>
>>>>> You can then process pull requests as you would with any Git repo.
>>>>>
>>>>> It might be that the project as is is doing it's job in a manner that
>>>>> satisfies its users, without further tweaking ;)
>>>>
>>>> Definitely an interesting idea. Just want to mention, it was the Board
>>>> which has asked me.
>>>> So far I can't judge on the incoming patches; I have no clue on c++
>>>> nor do I plan to build up the skills.
>>>> I thought this would maybe not be enough to make changes in an ASF
>>>> repository. I have applied a few
>>>> patches recently but it made me a bit uncomfortable.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, we wouldn't have an PMC member which actually would
>>>> oversee the incoming patches. And who is actually supposed to vote on
>>>> it?
>>>>
>>>> That said it is unlikely that we can make up a community again.
>>>>
>>>> As I understood it, this is when the attic comes into play. Unused
>>>> repositories which do not get any maintenance. They are still readable
>>>> though and can be used.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, creating a GIt mirror for log4cxx sounds reasonable despite
>>>> all concerns. It is a small, first step. We can then see what happens.
>>>> Maybe when I find some time I will have a chat with the attic people.
>>>> Actually I am also a bit afraid before the extra work without real
>>>> benefit.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> Christian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Rhys Ulerich <rhys.ulerich@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of them
>>>>>>> said they might apply a couple of patches here and there, but
nobody
>>>>>>> burst out in emotions saying, YAY, this is it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The library is, more or less, stable and feature complete.  There's
>>>>>> not much shepherding to be done in terms of driving the functionality
>>>>>> in some particular direction.  That is, unless there's some burning
>>>>>> feature set that folks need that hasn't been discussed on the log4cxx
>>>>>> mailing list in the years that I have been lurking.  The problem
seems
>>>>>> to be that the overhead of contributing small fixes is off-puttingly
>>>>>> high.  It's hard to elicit a YAY from anyone under these
>>>>>> circumstances.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For now I would like to propose that I am cloning log4cxx to
my GitHub
>>>>>>> account and move the svn repos to the attic. That way I can overlook
>>>>>>> if there is a team growing around log4cxx or not. Also I can
ask for
>>>>>>> ICLAs before accepting pull requests, which should help when
we go
>>>>>>> back to incubation. If there is, we can go back to incubation
at any
>>>>>>> time. If there is not, then well, no harm done.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Comments?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like this approach.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would ask that, before you do this, you please make one last 10.2
>>>>>> release off the Apache-blessed sources.  Trunk differs in slight
but
>>>>>> important ways from 10.1 (e.g., it builds).  This way the distro
>>>>>> package managers can at least get one last blessed version into their
>>>>>> pipelines before the log4cxx community goes off and experiments with
a
>>>>>> reboot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Rhys
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>>>> https://www.timeandbill.de
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>> https://www.timeandbill.de
>



-- 
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de

Mime
View raw message