logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Smith <psm...@aconex.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Overview
Date Thu, 12 May 2005 07:47:04 GMT
Mark, I appreciate your energy you have at the moment, it's inspiring.

On 12/05/2005, at 3:05 PM, Mark Womack wrote:

> 2) Abandon the 1.3 version number, the main branch becomes version  
> 1.5 below.

If we do this, we should probably post some rationale to the rest of  
the community, everyone's been following 1.3, so we should be open  
about how this all came to be.  Lets not "Do a Sun" and change labels  
for the hell of it without a clear message to the community.

> 3) Release a 1.4 version with the TRACE change and other fixes that  
> will make life happier for the user base (action item: determine  
> the other changes).  No major structural changes.  Just most  
> "important" bugfixes. The base of the 1.4 code would start from the  
> v1_2branch.  Timeframe is within a month of the 1.2.11 release.
This action has the risk that 1.4 blows out to be a bigger release  
than necessary.  It will also mean that quite a bit of back-porting  
effort will be needed. This stuff is already in HEAD, and will  
require time and testing to make sure it's perfect ported to the  
older branch..

This is the classic time investment problem.  Do we keep plowing  
ahead to 1.3 completion, setting only very small goals to be left to  
do for 1.3?  We have the advantage at the moment that people are  
trying out 1.3 as it stands now, and going through the change  
management, I'd hate for them to through that effort away.  (as a  
side note: we'll need good documentation on how to convert a project  
from 1.2.x to 1.3/1.5)

I think the 1.4 release as you suggest is going to be a big  
distraction.  The _last_ thing we want is a poor release, and so I  
see poor-old-1.3-now-1.5 not nearing completion till next year  
because we'll spend so much time on 1.4... :(  I'm not saying we  
shouldn't do this, just expressing my feelings.

> 4) Release a 1.5 version based on the current main branch.  This  
> would be what we are calling v1.3 today.  Timeframe: release of  
> first final version by 10/2005.

This is sad, because so many people have problems with the  
DailyRollingFileAppender that 1.3 could solve, but I know trying to  
fix that in 1.4 is asking for trouble.

> I am +1 on the above, and I am committing to make it happen.  I am  
> willing to be the release manager for the proposed versions.  We  
> will all need to focus and do what we need to complete these  
> releases, especially v1.5.
I'm willing to put up and help with whatever if someone can help me  
by saying "I think you can do this, can you have it done by such-n- 
such".  I know that probably makes me sound like a baby, but it's  
more likely I'll commit and actually do it right now! :)  Life is  
really full on for me at the moment.

I hope I don't come across as a Negative Nelly.  I'm glad that we're  
actively having this discussion, because I feel we have drifted along  
for a while (and I've just drifted along without doing anything for a  

Please, those non log4j developers, speak up with your say about what  
you want.


Paul Smith

To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org

View raw message