logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Womack <mwom...@apache.org>
Subject Re: log4j 1.3 prioritized tasks
Date Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:53:25 GMT
I was pretty tired last night, so maybe my reaction as "shameful" was
a little much.  But I still believe there is a lot of room for
improvement that needs to be done.

If you look at the documentation we have, there is the short
introduction (which is old and needs some updating; it doesn't even
talk about xml), the javadoc's (which one has to swim through to make
sense of), a bunch of articles (some good, some ok), and Ceki's book. 
The only comprehensive documentation we have is Ceki's book, which
folks have to buy.  I don't have problem with there being a book, and
I recommend people buy it, as it is a great book.  There's even
another book out there from APress (which maybe se should mention on
our pages as well).

But I think that a good open source project should provide a slightly
higher level of organized, up-to-date documentation than we have,
especially for being as mature of a project as we are.

(And I still haven't given up on the build changes, but I won't drag
the rest of the project into that rat hole with me.  "I acquiesce to
the demands of the greater good" :-)

-Mark

On 12/22/05, Yoav Shapira <yoavs@apache.org> wrote:
> Hola,
>
> > biased view.  But I don't agree with the documentation.  We REALLY need to
> > do something.  I think our current state is pretty shameful.
>
> I only bundled them together because one of the reasons for moving to
> Maven is improved documentation.
>
> > I'd like to
> > get more community involvement, but there hasn't been much reaction.  I'd
> > like to set it up and then have it evolve on its own track.  I don't
> > consider it a "pure enhancement".
>
> I actually don't think the docs are shameful, or you'd be seeing more
> involvement from the community and more doc RFEs in Bugzilla.  No
> documentation is ever perfect, and there is plenty of room for
> improvement of course, but I think log4j's documentation is not bad
> considering its audience of developers/engineers concerned about
> low-level details like logging.
>
> > But the code cleanup and review should come first.
>
> Yeah, for sure.
>
> --
> Yoav Shapira
> System Design and Management Fellow
> MIT Sloan School of Management
> Cambridge, MA, USA
> yoavs@computer.org / www.yoavshapira.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
>

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


Mime
View raw message